Ravenser

As far as I'm able to tell with the feeler gauges I have, the Streamline points I've measured have had flangeways with similar values. About 15 years ago someone who had had extended contact with Peco to press for improved pointwork and OO sleepering reported to DOGA members that Peco had privately acknowledged that their "standard" was a 1.39mm flangeway. Such evidence as I have seen and such measurements as I've been able to make suggest that this is true and has remained the case. As far as I can make out, there is no difference between the flangeways of code 100 Streamline and code75 Streamline, though the flangeways on Peco Setrack certainly used to be coarser still. (Contrary to popular belief code 75 is not "finer" than code 100 , in the normal sense of the word when discussing track standards) It is well worth checking recent production however , as a few years ago there was some suggestion that Peco might reduce their flangeways to the NMRA maximum value (1.27mm) or slightly less , as tooling fell due for renewal. Whether they have actually done anything I don't know - since it would presumably have been a question of doing it tool by tool, it is very difficult to know exactly where to look for the evidence The packaging for Streamline says absolutely nothing about the track standards to which it is made. This is characteristic of Peco....... The two big gains available in terms of better OO track are - 1) approximate 4mm scale sleepering and 2) check rails that function properly. The two issues are not necessarily connected, although if you handbuild points to achieve 2) you will of course take appropriate steps to achieve 1) I am not convinced that there is any significant issue with drop in on handbuilt OO pointwork to established standards . If the flangeway is reduced to with the NMRA standard figure (1.27mm) there will be no drop in with RP25/110 wheels and drop-in with EM profile wheels will be very minimal. I do not see drop-in as the real issue : for me the key is ensuring that the check rails operate - ie positive check clearance. Get that , and you have 98% of the potential benefit. And there are a number of ways of skinning that particular cat

So that's where BR Railfreight red/grey came from!

Just as well Heljan have stuck to RP25/110 . Things that are made more liable to fall off because a manufacturer deviates from standard to make it look pretty is not a good idea. Peco streamline is already coarser than is ideal , so don't dig the hole any deeper.... (Streamline being what 90%+ of these will run on...)

There are so many things to sort out with this one it's difficult to know where to begin. I began with the trailer To my surprise and relief , when I removed the screws holding in place the Black Box on the underframe came off "just-like-that" , and it was empty . No messy sawing and cleaning up needed. Since the weight in this vehicle is all above the floor, there was no need to sort out alternative replacement weights. And if I ever feel bold enough to tackle my second 155 it should be possible to cut out the representational equipment box fronts for re-use, since further underframe castings are unlikely to be forthcoming. The enigmatic archery targets by the bogies were removed and replacement air tanks fabricated from Plastruct tubing with milliput stuck on each end and filed round when set. I had to buy an entire packet of Plastruct tubing - this should keep me in underframe airtanks for several lifetimes The interior mouldings are the same in both power and trailer cars, and so are the chassis mouldings and bogies. The interior therefore stops well short at both ends of the vehicle leaving vast empty zones in the ends. Remedial action is necessary - and the work done can be seen below. Obviously nothing can be done about the driving end on the power car: as you can see this is filled by the motor bogie. The only possible solution here would involve replacing the motor bogie with a Black Beetle, complete rebuilding of the bogies throughout, new trailing pickup arrangements and completely new pivot arrangements. The bogie pivot arrangements at the outer ends preclude carrying the floor right through the trailer . I cut away the projections on the bogie unit (which is the base of the power bogie with the mechanism left out) to allow extension of the floor on that side. Additional seating was cut from spare Hornby Mk4 interiors left from the Bratchill 150 project . Not an exact match but packed up to height with 20 thou styrene and painted suitably it is effective. Saloon end and toilet partitions are made from 40 thou styrene. On the trailer I used some Bratchill interior partitions for the cab partition and vestibule/saloon partition , then realised I will need to make replacements if I ever finish the power car on the 150. Photographic evidence for W Yorks Pacers shows red upholstery - so both interiors have been suitably painted with Humbrol acrylic crimson The satellite half of an Express Models 155 lighting kit has been installed running along the vehicle roof (and through cutouts in the cab end bulkheads). A hole for the plug/socket has been drilled out and removed at the base of the gangway Kadees (number 42 - medium overset with 1 mounting shim) have been fitted to the outer ends . So far the trailer car has a medium underset Kadee at the inner end - there is no need to observe the Kadee height standard on a coupling internal within the vehicle The biggest and nastiest job is the one I didn't manage to duck - flush-glazing. Nobody does flushglazing for a 155 or is ever likely to - so I had to do it the hard way - remove the glazing strip, cut it into pieces, and file them down until the window glazing fits into the aperture. To minimise any damage to the surface of the glazing during the long and tedious process of filing down I applied sellotape over the raised section of the glazing. In one case - I still don't know why - a small crack appeared in the bottom of the glazing , visible when seen from one direction. The filed-down glazing was held in place by running gloss varnish thickly round the frame of the window aperture with a small brush , then pressing the glazing into place from behind This took over a week of work, three or four windows at a time - and that's for only 1 vehicle out of 2. There are 60 windows in the sides of a 2 car 155 unit Yes, it's a big improvement. It has to be, for the effort. And now I'm committed to doing the same with the Pacers, which only makes it worse. (One additional point - before removing the glazing it was necessary to cut through the downward projections, and glue them in place on the bodyshell using solvent run in under capillary action, very cautiously. This is necessary because these projections contain recesses into which the body-retaining lugs on the chassis fit. I laid the glazing in the bodyshell overnight - next day I noticed that one strip had become slightly clouded in 2 places. I don't know why , and a coat of gloss varnish on the back was only a partial fix. The final effect is of 3 dirty windows - not perfect but not a disaster. Windows did/do occasionally get coated with a scurf, presumably in the carriage wash, but I could have done without this weathering effect) The fight goes on...

The obvious thing to be done when you have a new model is to run the layout... So the 101 was given a thorough workout during a running session, just to make sure there were no hidden bugs : Tail traffic is an operational feature of the layout - the CCT will be attached to the outward working of the morning parcels. Hence DMUs need functional couplings. This gets in the way of full end detail, and I'm toying with the idea of giving the 114 fully detailed ends to use the Craftsman pack I have - when I finally get around to building the DC kit in my cupboard. The idea is that a 114 would be 2" longer , and therefore much less suitable for tacking CCTs and the like on the back of.. As it is, a short-frame DMU plus CCT just fits into Pl.1 The Blue period engineer's train awaits running round. The Zander has had additional lead stuffed under it to ensure it behaves A busy scene at Blacklade. While I was about it, it suddenly occurred to me that DMUs do after all work in multiple , and I now have two low density 2 car DMUs of classes 101 and 108. Could they be consisted? Despite rather different mechanisms (Limby motor bogie and Bachmann motor bogie) it turned out that they could , quite comfortably. Admittedly the resulting 4 car formation is a squeeze into Pl.3 and is way too big for anywhere else , so it's not terribly practical. But I have a DC Kits 128 to do, and that would give me a very workable 3 car formation - so long as the Replica MLV chassis proves compatible with the other 2 units Along the way I discovered that the Bachmann/ESU decoders I fitted in the 108 don't support advanced consisting - just basic oldstyle consisting. So we now have Coupling Codes: Blue Square for units supporting only basic consisting, Red Triangle for compatible units supporting advanced consisting, Red Circle for second generation units with Limby motor bogie or compatible (Red Triangle and Red Circle units can physically work together, but it's inauthentic) , and Black Cross units - meaning the 158 which has a thoroughly uncompatible centre motor drive and no working couplings on the end. With a reworked 155 under way I should (hopefully) have another unit that can work with my two 153s, and then finally I start to get a variety of permutations for multiple unit working in the later period too.

It does explain why the Clayton West branch closed in 1983.... I'd say it depends on what the back story for the layout is - ie do these lines get axed by Beeching or make it through to S. Yorks PTE ?(official policy - "nothing round here is ever going to change from 1974 / Year 1 of the People's Republic of S.Yorkshire. Especially not the fares") Though assuming they don't susrvive and you only need a few passengers is the quickest, easiest and cheapest option. You can always say that while the DMU is in the station these are just the few passengers whove got there early and are waiting for departure

I'm starting to wonder if it was an ER term - as I grew up in Lincolnshire, and I think I may have seen the term on the bottom of pocket timetables , explaining "Paytrain"

I certainly remember in the 80s the conductor -guard going through the train checking/selling tickets and then continuing through the door into the cab to sit with the driver

I would put four or five figures in each coach, maybe less as lines facing closure often had very lightly loaded locals (I seem to recall that in Rails across the Fells David Jenkinson worked out from the S&C booking figures that by the end Carlisle-Hellifield locals were carrying about a dozen people) I don't think quality really matters inside a coach - all you're going to see is people-shaped blobs. Certainly figurine wargaming quality work is totally unnecessary. I've used Slaters seated figures painted by me and some cheap prepainted plastic figures off someone's stand where the figures really are little more than shaped blobs. The conductor-guard might well be found in a cab for part of the run . Admittedly he would probably join the driver for a bit of company , but in the back unit of a 2+2 formation with no through gangways he might well take refuge in the front cab of the back unit. So I think it's defensible - the anomalies of having figures are going to be far less than the anomalies created by not having them For what it's worth I've put figures in coaches and DMUs I've worked over/weathered, with a driver each end and painted the interiors. Duck-egg blue (as in Spitfire) seems a useful shade to represent the pale formica interiors

The "Limby" motor bogie is excellent when it has all wheel pickup and is used in suitable applications (1-2 car). I've recently finished an upgrade of a Hornby 101 and adaption to 2 car and am very pleased with the results though running is not quite as immaculate as in my 153s and 156 which don't "benefit" from traction tyres. Running was noticeably less good when the poor thing was asked to shift 3 cars I remember in the 1970s you were liable to be put down fast and hard by enthusiasts if you suggested there was anything that wasn't terminally wrong with then current scene. I think the lack of interest in DMU's is partly attributable to the fact that Modernisation Plan units weren't really spottable as they didn't have unit numbers

Titanium dioxide is the pigment that makers paint white (my late father used to work for one of the major manufacturers, so TiO2 is one chemical formula I'm not likely to forget) To the best of my knowledge it's non-toxic and produced from naturally occurring mineral sands , so I'd be astonished if it had been banned. It's predecessor was white lead - nuff said.. It's probably something else in the paint that's been banned

We left matters with a part-fixed Limby DMU and a mild crisis of conscience about details, identities and my general rate of progress on things in general. Happily the 101 does not add to the latter as it's now finished - despite all the little extras that kept crawling out. The first little catch was when looking at various photos in Morrison's DMU book and online. Whatever the faults of the former as a piece of scholarship (The Railcar Association compiled 9 pages of errata to it, and I only managed to print off 3 of them before the Railcar website disappeared for protracted and extensive rebuilding like a medieval cathedral), a photo's a photo and dates are normally reliable. Lima produced 101s with both the early 4 cab marker lights and the later 2 + lower 2 digit code panel. What Hornby did not issue was a DMU with 2 marker lights, one over each buffer , and plated headcode box - which is what happened after their refurbishment in the late 70s /early 80s. This had to be fixed - which meant out with the Xurons and crunch , followed by a good deal of rubbing down with emery boards. Patch painting was also needed, and since Hornby's yellow is a bit orange this meant tinting the Precision Paints post 84 yellow with a spot of Royal Mail red (Railmatch - and to hand from work on the NRX). Since the coats showed further rubbing down was needed, and since yellow takes about 3 coats to cover adequately, this was fun and games - especially with all the colour-matching by eye . I chickened out on a full repaint because I doubted I'd get near Sandakan's finishing with 3 brush coats, there was a risk of getting on glazing and other areas it shouldn't be , difficulties with achieving neat boundaries and avoiding bits of the old colour showing through at edges and elsewhere. What I did do was give a thin wash over the rest of the cab end with surplus paint (I was painting ends alternately) and apply a satin varnish with a drop of Precision yellow. This should blend everything and knock back the orange tint a little - and it seems to work. Somewhere in all this I managed to ping off one of the plastic windscreen wipers and a micro-wormhole in the carpet swallowed it. It will probably re-emerge under the headboard of the bed in another room in 6 years time. The plastic wipers aren't great - but I now had to replace them anyway, a job I'd been hoping to avoid. I managed to find an etch of wipers from A1 Models and fitted a pair at both ends, as this seemed to match what was shown by 1980s photos. I know have my own photographic evidence of two refurbished 3 car 101 sets in the E Midlands in 1981 with single wipers so this obviously wasn't a standard change at refurbishment , but is probably correct. Whether the wipers used are entirely correct I'm not sure - but they're much finer than the original plastic and also the right colour The plastic gangways were replaced - I was lucky to have the rest of a packet of MJT British Standard gangways , part of which had already been used for the Ratio LNW set. This time I needed to use the cast whitemetal bases, and I made up new faceplates from 20 thou plasticard, using the gaps in the etch where the original etched plates had been as a template for the scriber. I now have proper touching gangways . A thin wash of blue-grey Humbrol wash mixed with dark brown wash was applied to the roof and the gloss shine subsequently removed with matt varnish. A little blue-grey wash with a touch of brown , heavily thinned was applied to the sides and any surplus drawn off with the brush to tone down the finish and blend in the transfers and patch painting . The wash also picked out the door lines, and I dry brushed the hinges with a little dirty black. Inner ends received a couple of wash coats of the blue-grey wash The underframe was given a wash coat of Railmatch frame dirt One major issue I ducked was the underframe "black box". I would certainly have had a go if the front bogie wasn't being held together by superglue , and liable to fail if subjected to the stresses of repeated disassembly and reassembly. The "black box" on this unit isn't bad actually - there's only a small area of plastic that shouldn't really be there , and for some time I couldn't work out how it could be cut away anyway. Enlightenment dawned when I saw a posting on another forum. Lateral thinking - or at least lateral cutting - is required. The black box is cut along its length, behind the moulded detail , leaving a thin "façade" on each side , then you file out the bits that shouldn't be there and build up the various boxes behind. But , as I said, because there is a patched glue repair on the power car I've ducked it for the moment. What I might do , however, is experiment with the "spare" chassis removed from the trailer when converting it from DMCL to DTCL. I could then relatively quickly convert to a power twin set if I ever wanted simply by swapping the interior and bogies from trailer to power chassis moulding and clipping it back into the bodyshell (The trailer car numbering would then be wrong, but how many people would notice?) What I did do was adopt a bodge mentioned on Jim Smith-Wright's P4 Newstreet website. This consists of painting the few bits of plastic that shouldn't be there with matt black - at which point the underframe equipment stands out and the spurious areas merge back into the shadow under the vehicle . He found it sufficiently effective that it was several years before he got round to doing the full underframe rework, and as the photos show it's quite successfu I reassembled everything , tested it quickly , then decided to remove the capacitor to improve slow speed running . Having snipped off the beige blob, I decided to remove the wires back beyond the collar . This was a serious mistake - when I put the chassis back on the track, it was dead as a doornail. Panic! Further inspection revealed not one but two loose wires. The horrible realisation dawned - the capacitor was soldered directly to the motor terminals along with the feed wires, and in wielding the Xurons to take out the remains of the capacitor I had also neatly cut the wires off the motor terminals..... Having dropped out the motor bogie (it's held into the chassis frame by a screw from above) I managed to resolder the wires to where they are supposed to be and we were back in business. It's now been cleaned, oiled and thoroughly tested through a full operating session after a proper running in session on club test tracks (something it never got when originally bought). Performance is pretty satisfactory, though not quite as good as other units with the same motor bogie but no traction tyres That, I think, constitutes a result

What that is rather reminiscent of is photos of the canyon that was Nottingham Victoria. Possibly some kind of short overall roof at the concourse end of the station would act as a suitable "view-blocker" to close off the scene

Depends on the day of the month... CMA are going out for a USD1000/TEU increase again ("other carriers are available/ your GRI may vary")

I have two Hornby 155s sitting in the pile of stock boxes One is in Regional Railways livery. I've had it for at least 15 years and it's never run. It was meant as material for converting into 153s to support a proposed club layout project which never happened The other is in West Yorkshire red and white . This was acquired as a modest priced placeholder for a later club layout project (which got as far as running bare boards and some scenery before it died ). It has a decoder (a Macoder if you ask), it's run , and as Blacklade is supposed to have services south from West Yorkshire via Sheffield, its perfectly in place. Since the thing actually ran quite well, it was a regular on the layout until I installed Knightwing point motors (the dummy prototype sort cast in whitemetal) . These fouled the "black box" on the underframe, so the unit was stopped. As the packets of NNK/MTK underframe castings have turned up, and as the 101 is now done, and the Kirk Gresley 51' pigeon van well advanced, attention has turned to the poor old W.Yorks 155 while I still have some modelling time. I want at least to get this started , and resuscitation turned from a good intention into an actual project. Sorting out the various RTR DMUs and their shortcomings has always been a good intention for the future. However with the 101 done, we move on to the next. The W Yorks 158 is in their later livery and not really suitable for an "early period" sequence set in 1985-90. The 155 is eminently suitable. The Hornby, (ex Dapol) 155 dates from around 1990, and has not been in the catalogue for a few years now. It's quite probable Hornby will never produce it again. It's not a great model, dating from a time when OO RTR was much more basic than would be tolerated nowadays, and originated by a company whose standards were some distance behind the cutting edge at the time . It was the least worst of the 3 modern multiple units Dapol produced in the Dave Boyle era - the Dapol Pendolino was a crude lemon beside its excellent rival the Bachmann Voyager, and the Dapol 150 is a model that is spoken of with a shudder when old modern image modellers sit in the pub by the fire and tell of the terrible hardships they endured in their youth. Hornby seem to have chucked the tooling for those two in the skip (where it belonged) but they re-ran the 155 for a number of years with a decent finish and an improved mechanism. However it's considerably cruder than the 156 they inherited from Lima , and since only 7 units survive, owned by West Yorkshire , the rest being converted to 153s in 1990-2, its commercial potential is pretty limited. For these reasons it is most unlikely anyone will ever produce another RTR model . Like the EM2s, it's been stranded by the tide of history. Unlike the EM2s, it's never going to be iconic. It's a grubby middle-weight Sprinter. And next to a Hornby 153 (like wot I've got ...) it looks rough. There's so much wrong with this model that simply listing the issues is going to be quite enough for a substantial post. I'm not aiming at "the definitive 155". Assuming anyone could ever be bothered to attempt it, you wouldn't go this route . It has been suggested that a 155 can be converted from two Hornby 153s - a sort of reverse version of what BR did. However that would cost you at least £200 in raw materials, and assuming a professional paint job is required, the bill will be close to £300.There would also be the fun and games of hacking the chassis and consisting two separate mechanisms requiring two decoders. Money is tight, and even if I could source 2 x 153 it's not on for lots of reasons. I'm not that desperate for a perfect 155. So this is an attempt to patch up the unit I have , at minimal cost using stuff I have in stock, and tackle the shortcomings as far as I sensibly can. Here's a picture of the trailer car dismantled to help you spot the problems: Starting at the bottom - the black boxes on the underframe have to go : not only are they very wrong, the model is out of gauge with them. Fortunately this isn't going to be too hard, as can be seen. The tension-locks go and Kadees need to be fitted. I'm hoping I will be able to consist this unit with a 153 - the mechanical mismatch between a Limby motor bogie and a big Bachmann centre motor drive having proved impossible. This also means close coupling to minimise the Straits of Dover between the two vehicles. Unfortunately it's not going to be possible to fit working gangways and eliminate the gap completely. I have an Express Models lighting kit - arguably lights are needed on a second generation DMU and they are certainly an operator's convenience. These kits rely on wiring through from the power car, and they recommend you route the cable and plugs through a hole in the gangway between the vehicles. That's incompatible with fitting a paper bellows gangway. The Kadees would be in the way if I tried routing it below the gangway. And it looks very much as if the gangways are a little too narrow anyway. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the whole unit is 1-2mm too narrow, and that they've lost it in the gangways. (I have a decent scale side elevation drawing from Railnews Stockspot, but no scale drawings of the end from which to check). There is no solebar. The bodyside has been continued right the way down to the bottom of the chassis, and no doubt panel proportions have been played about with in the vertical axis (I said it wasn't up to modern standards...) . I gather the traditional fix for this was to paint a "fake solebar" along the bottom edge of the bodyshell Ploughs will be fitted , as I have some. Correct from the mid to late 90s but not in 1987-91. So ok when running in a "late period" running session (2000-06) but not for "early" (1985-90) The interior is incomplete. On the power car this is because the motor bogie fills up the driving end and the start of the passenger saloon. The only way you could address that would be to scrap the existing mechanism and replace with a Black Beetle and dummy at a cost of about £65, which is a step further than I'm prepared to go. There's a vast gaping hole in the floor at the cab end of the trailer, because they've used the same chassis moulding for power car and trailer car. For reasons which escape me, they've left out any interior at the inner ends as well - the seat moulding stops one window before the end of the passenger saloon and the rest of the vehicle is empty , so you can see straight through to the end doors on the other side. Providing extra seats and partitions at the inner ends is easy enough. On the trailer car I can fit partitions behind the cab and behind the vestibule , and extend the seating forward by one window : unfortunately because of the way the bogie is pivoted and retained at the sides it's not possible simply to extend the floor all the way, and nothing but complete reconstruction of the chassis at this end, with a totally restructured bogie and an entirely new pivot and retention arrangement would address that. Again, this kind of drastic rebuilding is further than I'm prepared to go: the more modest work will address most of the problem, and a one window gap in the trailer car seating will have to be lived with. It looks as if there should be clear plastic covers on the gangway doors at the cab ends . One or two shots show a yellow plate (eg 155 341), but generally the cover is clear but frequently very dirty. If it's dirty , it will conceal the wires running up from the Express Models lighting. I'm not renumbering - Sandakan's quality of finish is very good indeed and for my purposes one W Yorks 155 is as good as another. The final issue - and a major one - is the glazing. The real things are flush-glazed. So are Hornby's 153s. The ex Dapol 155 is not, with very obvious ledges at the windows. The glazing comes out easily enough , but the only way I can see of fixing the problem is to cut out each pane individually and slightly oversize then file to a fit and fix . I am going to give it a first shot on the door windows , where the recess looks particularly bad - if that works , then I may be up for doing all 44 windows in the passenger saloons As far as I'm aware there's no replacement glazing available from any source If anyone knows how this problem has been tackled by anyone in the past, I'd appreciate the info. If the work is really too difficult or securing too uncertain I might have to leave the main saloon windows as is , but it's a big visual issue , and I'd really like to avoid that

From what's been said by others , I'd feel more confident about the sticking powers of shellac than spray mount. I'm not sure I'd give spray mount more than 5 years , and the last thing you want is that lot delaminating . Belt and braces seems very attractive

Blacklade is in the North Midlands, with services to Birmingham, Nottingham and Sheffield via Chesterfield. The latter either extends through to Leeds or is worked by W Yorkshire units. In the 1980s this means that 3 depots would obviously supply units - Derby Etches Park (DY), Lincoln (LN) and Tyesley (TS). Oddly South Yorkshire never had a DMU depot, despite being a fully fledged PTE - their units came either from Lincoln or Neville Hill (NL). There is a minor metaphysical issue about Etches Park, since Blacklade and Hallamshire replace Derby and Derbyshire in the scheme of things, and Blacklade is not on the main line nor a major rail centre. I assume the Midland had their headquarters at Nottingham , their main works at Toton, and where the alternate for Etches Park depot ends up in this parallel reality is anyone's guess (Chesterfield? Burton? Long Eaton? Ilkeston? Swanwick?)) Lincoln had the 114s - all of them - and some 105s. Etches Park (which sounds like it should have had a pile of Craftsman conversion kits and Comet sides) had 3 car 120s until they were replaced by the first production Sprinters of Class 150/1 in 1985. That leaves Tyseley and Neville Hill as potential homes for my 101. TS looked the obvious candidate till I got out my various ABCs for the period. TS was an exponent of hybrid sets, and when I hunted through the numbers I could not find any pairs of DMBS + DTCL on their books in the period. In 1988 they had DMBS M53222 on the books (scrapped by 1992) but no DTCL. The first relevant listing of TS formations I have is the 1992 Platform 5 volume, when 101 DMCL 53242 was working with 116 DMBS 53073. Even finding 3 car 101 formations to match the original Hornby set was tough although I found M53303/M59124/M53328 all allocated in 1988. No idea if they were in the same set though. TS doesn't work for my 101 unit Hornby's W-prefix numbers are taken from a photo in Morrison's book of a 3 car Canton unit C813 at Cheltenham Spa in 1982 (p56, bottom). That won't do either - such a unit would not have got past New Street. At this stage we are down to Neville Hill. You then start hunting through books and looking at photos , and realising that a lot of power/trailer sets were allocated to Chester (CH), Heaton, Hull Botanic Gardens (BG) , Cambridge (CA) and Norwich Crown Point (NC) , and are out of contention. A photo in Morrison just above the one Hornby used shows the end of DTCL E54218 at Leeds in 1983.My books show it allocated to NL in late summer 83 and still there in 85-6, having survived the arrival of the 141s. That's a start. The caption claims it has S Yorks PTE branding , which would be great - but MetroTrain was W Yorks PTE's branding. 101s definitely worked into Sheffield from Leeds - these will have been Neville Hill units - and definitely worked Sheffield- Doncaster: those must also have been NL units A hunt for a suitable companion found DMBS E51250, also at NL on both dates. Since NL does not seem to have maintained fixed unit formations it's anyone's guess whether they were paired - but you can't prove I'm wrong, either. The yellow stripe is an issue. Another photo notes the abolition of first class in W Yorks in 1983 - with a TCL which has been downgraded to TSL and lost it's stripe. However abolition of first in W Yorks would not affect units supplied for S Yorks PTE services (On the other hand the People's Republic of South Yorkshire in the 80s might have thought a tumbril to the guillotine a more appropriate vehicle for first class passengers. When BR reintroduced the Master Cutler a few years later as a Pullman, Sheffield City Council officially objected to the new service and called for its withdrawal as elitist.). I found a photo of DTCL E54365 on a Sheffield service around 1990 , with double arrows but no yellow stripe - as I couldn't find an obvious DMBS partner , that was a non-starter, too Another point which I missed - never overlook your own resources . It was only when I was compiling this - well after I'd finished - that I remembered I had this photo. Slightly tweaked as to brightness, contrast and colour for the occasion and with a sharpening tool applied to mitigate its photographic awfulness: In December 1981 we flew back from Sydney for contract leave over Christmas. Dad hired a car at Heathrow, and when we got home he was somewhat frustrated to find that the car hire company's nearest return point was Nottingham - especially as the weather had taken a turn for the worse. So we drove to Nottingham , and I got the rare treat of a train ride back from Nottingham Midland on a freezing day (The rare treat of a train ride on BR that is - train rides on the NSWGR were available for the price of a mile and a half walk to and from the station with some fairly steep hills on the way, and a 30 cent day return) This was taken at Lincoln St Marks - the 3 car 101 on the left had just brought us from Nottingham. From the fact we were hanging about on the platform at St Marks for me to take photos I think we were waiting to connect into a Newark Northgate - Grimsby train to take us to Market Rasen. (For younger readers - in those days Lincoln Central could not be reached off the Newark/Nottingham line, which continued through St Marks, over the High Street about 100 yards south of the surviving crossing , and joined the GC Lincoln-Barnetby line at Durham Ox, a few hundred yards east of Central station, just before you passed Lincoln DMU depot. A new connection into Central via the northern part of the former Lincoln Avoiding Line was opened in mid 1985 and St Marks and the last mile or so of the MR route into Lincoln closed. A facinating glimpse of St Marks in its MR heyday can be seen here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/30999-lincoln-st-marks-engine-shed/&do=findComment&comment=1624075) The salient point here is a comparison of the cab ends with these on the Lima model: Both 101s - presumably based at Derby Etches Park and certainly refurbished (a shot taken at Nottingham before departure shows the lefthand 101 in blue/grey) - retain the original single windscreen wiper, despite my belief these were incorrect for the 80s. The lamp irons are quite noticeable - against my decision not to try fitting the Craftsman ones. And I'm quite certain that the destination boxes are significantly deeper than Lima's letterbox slots. I couldn't get Worksop or Derby from Charlie Petty's sheet into the Lima boxes (Not that I'd have used Derby since Blacklade replaces Derby ) Here DERBY fits with room to spare despite being a much larger font than DONCASTER which only just fits vertically in the box on the model The reason for this is something raised by other modellers and quite clear in this comparison : the cab windows on the Lima model are rather too tall and more like those of a Derby unit (Yes I know I said these two 101s are probably Derby units. Just not that sort of Derby unit...) All of this is way beyond my ability to correct and I haven't attempted it. The difference in yellow is more complex. The Hornby yellow is definitely too orange, though I've toned it down a bit with washes and varnish. But it's not as orange in normal light as it appears here, and it represents the post '84 Warning Panel Yellow , which was a more orange shade. The DMUs in the photo are displaying the pre '84 yellow , which was a paler, more lemon shade . PS (By the way, it's very sobering to read this , when checking back down the blog to make sure I've got the tags right . http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/296/entry-5627-ive-started-so-ill-finish/ Sorting out the 101 was then a pending job, possibly later that year, as the bits were in hand. That was four and a half years ago. Painting the interior of the 108 and weathering was seen as a quick win for the near future. It's still seen as a quick win for the near future The Pacer had one brief splutter of progress about 2 years ago . I have hopes of doing something about it later in the year. The Bratchill 150 is indefinitely stalled. Realtrack still haven't got round to a 144 in earlier W.Yorks livery . The loco-hauled replacement set is a reality. So, as of last autumn , is the upgraded Airfix 31. The Cambrian Dogfish and Shark mentioned are built and in traffic . It only took almost 4 years . So is the LNW set Some of the rest could be reposted.... And I'm shocked to think how long the resin WD road van and DOGACOV B have been pending) http://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/johnsons/idler/chap88.htm

It would make some sense to extend the wires as far as Corby as an outer suburban operation - presumably the new Thameslink fleet would be used and it would improve services /relieve pressure up to Kettering. It sounds as if work on the ground so far doesn't extend much further than this

I'm a bit more optimistic about the future than some, but there clearly is an issue . However I would see it more as the question of a bulge in the hobby. There was, clearly, a "trainset generation" and a trainset boom, coinciding very roughly with the "baby-boomers". The trainset boom can be dated fairly precisely - from the resumption of Hornby Dublo production in 1948 to the sharp downturn in 1962-4, which saw the demise of TT3 and of Hornby Dublo. For that period, clearly, the trainset was the must have toy for boys - and this is reflected in the age profile of the hobby. Trainsets continued as a volume market through the 60s, 70s and 80s - and are still with us. But there was clearly quite a sizeable hobby before 1939 - and that can't have depended on people who grew up with trainsets . Effectively the hobby has been boosted by two big waves: the generation who grew up with prewar Hornby Gauge O and moved into scale modelling post war - this is the generation of Cyril Freezer, Peter Denny, Frank Dyer and Jack Ray - and the post war generation represented by folk like Coachmann, Tony Wright and Iain Rice. It's the second group, returning to the hobby in their 40s, that drove the big boom on the scale side of the hobby from 1977 and the flowering of the finescale movement from the late 70s. Clearly that surge is now fading. But the pipeline is long in railway modelling, and we probably already have another 30-40 years of the hobby "baked in", albeit on a more modest scale. I'm more concerned about the disappearance of spotters , and the noticeable greying of DEMU - when it was founded most members were under 35 - now I'd say most are over 40. But that still gives Showcase another 30 years.... The number of shows has risen by about 25-30% since the Millenium , and clearly this is not going to be sustainable - the supply of new layouts is already a problem. But that would only take us back to where we were in the 90s. I suspect that in many cases clubs tend to be a fixed group of people - and often it's a case of an old club being replaced by a new club, rather than succession within a club. The numbers of modellers under 35 on here is significant. While the forum membership may not be a representative sample , the absolute number of people concerned suggests that there will still be a hobby in 40 years time , even if a much smaller one

I had good intentions, but somehow a 101 didn't feature in them... I've got a 101 - I've had it for years. A Limby 3 car 101 in blue/grey was one of the things acquired in the RTR buying spree when I started building Blacklade a few years ago. Being ex Lima and a dowdy Modernisation unit it was rather looked down on as a quick placeholder. After all Bachmann would no doubt displace the Limby model with a splendid state of the art model in a few years Then the power car took a tumble, resulting in the pivot pin of the trailing bogie fracturing and detaching. A panic-stricken repair with superglue took a turn for the worse when I noticed I'd managed to get a superglue mark on both sides of the bodyshell. A hasty attempt to patch paint the mark with an elderly tin of what was supposed to be BR Grey only left it looking much worse. I then found the repaired bogie left one end sitting about 1.5mm high. At which point the wretched thing was bundled back into its box and buried under other stock. Where it remained for 4 or 5 years. I managed to source some better rail grey point, and also a spare trailer chassis frame and power car chassis frame, along with a pair of what were supposed to be class 101 bogies . But nothing was actually done. The list of jobs to be done was long and resuscitating one mediocre RTR DMU when I have a perfectly good 108 wasn't near the top of it. Having some modelling time available I thought about patching up the bodyshell damage. I dug out a copy of the shortlived MRM magazine which featured an article by Rich Bucknall on a simple conversion to a 2 car power-trailer unit . This seemed very quick and simple - and had always been on the cards as 3 cars is really a bit awkward on Blacklade. So one Thursday evening the poor thing was dug out of its box. An emery board and the 1500 flexgrit soon cleaned down the small damaged area on the DMBS bodyshell, and a little Precision Paints Rail Grey made a good job of touching in. It looked like repair might be a success. On the other side damage was confined to the glazing on one window - and after a little scraping with a finger nail , essentially confined to one quarterlight on that window. A little gloss varnish patched that . The chassis was robbed from the TCL for use under the second driving vehicle to turn it into a DTCL. The exhaust pipes on this were pulled out. And at this point it all started to get a bit more complicated.... Firstly the holes left by the exhaust needed to be filled (Squadron green putty did the job) and patch-painted (Railmatch BR acrylic was to hand and was a reasonable match) . Not a problem Then the interior needed painting . That took a good deal longer than it sounds . Seats blue - except in First which was left unpainted to represent the faded gold upholstered armchairs one found there. Duckegg blue is a decent representation of the pale blue-green formica that featured in many Modernisation Plan DMUs , but which bits are duck-egg blue and which bits should be brown is a bit more complicated and I'm not sure I've left as much brown as I should. The interior needed populating - a raid on the figures box managed to cover that. Drivers were added at each end - Springside I think. At this point I realised there was no drivers' desk on the TCL interior - which by this stage was nicely painted and peopled for the DTCL. I had to cut it off the moulding I had swapped into the centre car, and fix in place on the DTCL interior The interior of the cab end glazing was painted dark grey where it is between the windows - this greatly reduced the prism effect round the edge of the cab windows One end of the DMBS was sitting about 1.5mm high because of the bodged repair . I was under the impression it was the chassis frame that had been damaged, but in fitting and removing the interior - to discover that the problem only manifested itself when the interior was clipped in - the repair to the pivot pin failed and I found out exactly what the problem was The bogie had to be stripped down - neither Humbrol solvent nor Plastic Weld would touch this plastic - and a rather better repair made with Hafix thick superglue. To avoid any repeat fracture I did not plug the bogie back into its hole until very late in proceedings , and I countersank the hole in the interior moulding underneath (using a craft knife) and opened it out with a rat-tail file, since clearly the top of the pivot pin had been fouling against this since the initial repair When Hornby retooled the power car chassis to take the new Limby motor bogie, they provided NEM pockets on the bogies. However the underframes on the non-powered cars remained exactly as Lima tooled them, complete with great big old style tension-locks . Those had to go and the hoops were trimmed off with Xurons . A suitable platform was left to mount replacement Kadees - I used #27 medium underset , with a single shim underneath, glued in place with a nylon Kadee screw taken through from the top and cut off below as a peg to anchor them. (These were obtained from Charlie Petty at Railex) This improves the front end appearance no end I also found a Craftsman DMU detailing pack . There were enough buffers for a 3 car unit - so I replaced the Lima buffers at the cab ends , since the Craftsman buffers looked a bit bigger - but left the buffers at the inner ends, which are less obvious. I still have enough buffers for a 2 car unit. However it became apparent that I could not fit the cast jumper cable connections , or buffer bean pipeworth as they would foul the swing of the bogie- mounted Kadees. Since I run parcels tail traffic - and it would be nice to work a DMU in multiple occasionally - Kadees are essential. As and when I build the parcels unit I could form up a 3 car rake, and with a considerable squeeze it may just be possible to run a 4 car short underframe set (101 + 108) A shot of the bits at this stage of proceedings is attached: Then I made the mistake of getting out the books to research a prototype identity , and things got more complicated......

Try Marcway for code 75 BH fishplates. They picked up the SMP range

Pictures of the raw castings are further up the thread (Sorry - I've only just noticed subsequent comments)

They have the couplings you fit to them . (a quick look at Coachmann's threads will show one of the country's best coach modellers fitting slimline tension-locks to his kit built coaches) The bogies should be no differently placed on RTR coaches - none of the manufacturers is moving the bogies from where they should be on the prototype, and nobody is reporting they won't go round curves. The more serious issue is that couplings may need to be bogie mounted , and not all types are accomodated (though Ratio and Kirk seem to have catered for mounting tension locks

Yes , you'll need to cut gaps in the rails to isolate the frog. One tip is that you can fill in the gaps with a sliver of plasticard (ie microstrip) glued in with cyano. This can then be trimmed back so that the rail surface is continuous and there is no risk of rail creep and the gap closing up. Obviously you should only do this once all soldering in the area is done as cyano gives off toxic gases if heated (The clue is in the name) You will also need to bond the switch rails to the relevant running rails underneath, and gap down the length of the swich rails to isolate them from each other, I understand that "normal" homebuild practice is to do exactly this from the start - isolate frog/gap between the switch rails , meaning that "normal practice" handbuilt yields a DCC ready point automatically. Why Marcway have taken a different approach beats me... The hole depends on the wire you are using and therefore on what point motor you are using. Keep it tight if you can - Marcway points can be stiff and the less slop in the whole setup the better. If you are using Tortoises you must replace the wire supplied by Circuitron with something stiffer

I suspect the brakesman seen in the photo is actually sitting in the doorway