Ravenser

The sirens have sounded the final all clear, the blackout and the blitz are things of the past - and about 40 years after it should have , Blacklade has finally acquired station lights and station signs. I'm even intending to sort out the "bomb damage" behind the station facade and actually finish off the station building. Not before time, either... In short over the last couple of weeks I've had a big burst of detailing on the layout, and it's made a huge difference. Not, I must admit, to my accumulated stocks of whitemetal detailing bits and sheets of printed signage . Those have only sustained a modest dent. I had a new unused sheet of Tiny Signs modern BR posters (close inspection suggests they are actually mostly of 1975-80 vintage: there's two posters for the new GN Electrics in there and another one advertising the Rainhill 150 commemorations , as well as lots of posters of HSTs). I've used 3 - I have 32 left... And so on down through the box of scenic bits. It's frightening just how much stuff you accumulate - "I'm sure it'll come in useful for a layout and it's only a couple of quid" Admittedly Blacklade is a pretty small layout, and I've tried to be sparing. With the boxfile I never really got round to adding more than a couple of items and I was surprised by how effective restraint was. It struck me then that it is all too easy to pile in the detail items just because you have them and feel you ought to use them . The result being something unnaturally busy, where the funeral is queuing behind the wedding and trying to avoid entanglement with the travelling fair : a "quintessence" as defined by Charles Lamb - "an apple pie made all of quinces" In fact reality is pretty quiet and sparse. I go past our local church quite regularly: I might see signs of a wedding once or twice a year. On a Sunday morning or evening you might see people going into or leaving a service, two or three or four of them at a time. But do you want to run the Sunday train service? Come to that, if there's a wedding on , it must be Saturday, so the freight trains won't be running.... Stations are not crowded places . I used to use Market Rasen from time to time - in fact it contributed a little to Blacklade , in terms of short platforms and vanished trainshed. There is a 2 hourly service in each direction. Get there 10 minutes before the train - you might be the only person there, there might be one or two others. 4 or 5 minutes to go - there's half a dozen waiting on one platform . The train comes - a bustle of activity - 8-10 people get on , 8-10 more get off. 5 minutes after the train's gone the station's deserted ... For at least 45 minutes of every hour, the only sign of life in the place is the cawing of the rooks in the trees behind Okay, a three platform terminus with services on three routes will be busier than that . But even my local station , with it's commuter service, is pretty deserted for long periods . It may be full of people before the morning commuter trains depart - but 5 minutes after one's gone there's only one or two people there, if that. Go in the afternoon, or the evening , and unless a train's just arrived, the place is almost deserted - just one or two hanging about under the platform canopy with nothing to do Blacklade is supposed to be a dreary run-down hulk of a station with a train service that is poor for a town of it's size. The effect of Ascot on race days or Waterloo at 5:30pm on a weekday is not wanted. On the other hand, signage.... The human brain blots out most of it but the modern world seems to be drowning in the stuff. When you actually stop to look how many signs there are in any view, in any street, on any station, you suddenly feel overpowered by it . And cars (not that I've much road to worry about) . They've been breeding . They swarm everywhere, thick masses of them, swelling from around the buildings. Never mind Day of the Triffids - "Day of the Common Hatchback" is more like it. I reckon that if you take the average street, parked cars outnumber visible human being by a factor of about 5.... And now they're fitting them with computers. You may be able to take out a zombie army with a machine gun but can you take out a lane of slowly advancing BMWs? Enough.... The lack of station lights and station nameboards was annoying me - the station looked bare , it was completely anonymous and lacked a certain vertical emphasis. I wanted T lights . Because in my youth , those T shaped fluorescent light standards were the norm , a familiar part of the grey universal BR Corporate image. Some were old and had the station name on them, others were newer and didn't . But every station had them and had had for years. Anything else was cause for a second look They all seem to have vanished while I wasn't looking. It was only yesterday... A rummage through the scenic box turned up 3 packets of PD Marsh castings, total 15 lamps. And 3 packets of Knightwing castings , total 18 lamps. I reckoned 15 or less would do it. The Knightwing castings are bigger - taller , with longer light strips across the top. After a certain amount of throught I reckon that the PD Marsh castings represent the original 1950s version , with station name on the strip light, and Knightwing represent the second generation 1970s/80s version, with a plain strip light . Given that Blacklade Artamon Square is a run down dump that has had no refurbishment/investment since Dr Beeching was Chairman of the BRB, I went with PD Marsh, . Several coats of Centro grey later (the jar has now finally expired) a few coats of Tamiya gloss white for the strip lights and some departmental gray on the top, I had lights. But not station signs on them. A rummage through the accumulated mass of sheets turned up something from DC Kits with blank Regional Railways plates on it - 9 of them. To get the actual name I produced a sheet of possible sign in Word - for modern BR signage , all that is needed is the name on a plain white background . Arial, in bold at 5 point size seemed to be ok , so that's what I went with. Suitable sized strips were then cut out and stuck to the DC Kits signs with Rocket glue, then the DC Kits signs were stuck to strips of plasticard. Then the plasticard strips were stuck to fixing castings robbed from the Knightwing packets Poster boards were a next step. Three whitemetal castings for standard notice boards were painted up: departure posters were added to two, and timetables to a third . Two of these three were also glazed with scraps of acetate sheet. After that three poster display cases were needed : these were made with 10 thou plasticard, edged round with square microstrip, the poster(s) added and glazed with scraps of clear plasticard. The route diagram came from a DC kits sheet, and three posters from a Signs of the Timessheet; three more were found on an old Tiny Signs sheet , which seems to reperent 1975-80 . At least it features posters for the 1980 Railhill cavalcade, the 1975-6 GN suburban electrification and lots of HSTs . Fortunately no Jimmy Saville though. I picked a couple of "holiday by train + ferry" posters as Blacklade is supposed to be set in the late 80s or 21st century. This does highlight just how long the post -steam era now is - you can't use posters from the age of Harold Wilson and Edward Heath next to current TOC liveried stock . It's actually more of a gap than using Edwardian posters on a 1950s BR layout... From there I moved on to signage , courtesy of two more sheets from DC Kits and Signs of the Times. By this time I was getting a bit alarmed about how much needed to be done , how long it was taking, (and how much stuff I had available to use) . So I adopted the rule that only the signage and items which were absolutely necessary should go in.... That was still an awful lot. Departure simplifier sheets on every platforms . Timetables (1 set) . Regional route map (1). 3 BR posters, 3 commercial posters . Litter bin on each platform . Platform bench on each platform - these were PD March items , bought at the CMRA Workshop and repainted blue - two went on the concourse , in place of the long - and narrow - platform 3 . Refreshment facilities in the form of 2 vending machines (S kits whitemetal blocks with Signs of the Times wrap round sheets) . Signs - these were stuck to scraps of 10 thou plasticard with Rocket card glue , and stuck to the walls with same.. Platform numbers for each platform. I decided after I'd installed the signs that I didn't really want to hide them by installing a length of canopy. Strictly speaking there ought to be some covered area on the platform to protect passengers when it rains , but having worked out what would stop being visible as a result , I've been deliberately lazy and decided to leave it out. The figure came from Cats Custom Characters and is beautifully painted. As I don't intend to have many figures on the layout I thought I could afford to have one really well done. Another job tackled was the installation of some Knightwing castings for point motors - I only had seven , so the point tucked under the bridge hasn't got one. These were painted and suitably weathered. I also installed a signal cabinet - a whitemetal casting from Radley . I still have 3 out of four that I bought in my scenic box , not to mention some InterCity Models castings , and a packet of Hornby Skaledale that turned up the other day. The shading was done with one of the new Humbrol washes , thinned - a technique shown on a video on the Humbrol website and apparently used by aero modellers to emphasise and shade the panel lines on planes. Finally the finishing touches were added to the fuelling point. It's striking how only a handful of small touches have a big impact - and are all that are needed. Two oil drums were added (Merit, weathered) plus one of the cast whitemeal pallets in the Signs of the Times pack , suitably sunk in the weeds outside the doors to the store . Hi-vis warning signs were added , and finally the actual fuelling pump . The support post ,and nozzle are from the Knightwing fuelling point kit - where they are essentially extra bits for an earlier version. And that was all I actually used from the kit... I could still built two entire fuelling points with what was left. The hose is from the Signs of the Times detailing pack , and I used the lot (15" - so it can reach the full length of a parked DMU.). It looked shiny and plastic so I toned it down with the Humbrol blue/grey wash And that was it on the detailing front . A couple of figures are needed , and I have to sort out the back of the station building

I've built two, but not in LNWR livery , and I built them very much as they came , since they were a first essay in coach kitbuilding. You are evidently aiming for a higher standard, but in OO at least, I don't think there is anything particularly wrong with the Ratio bogies . Both my kits had turned brass buffers though the shanks are very thin . I painted the sides before building, and weighted them to just over 100g Details in my blog here, though I suspect you are aiming much higher: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/296-on-ravensers-bookcase/?st=5 (Look through all entries referencing Set 1) I'm surprised how rarely we see these kits on layouts, given that they seem to have lasted to 1953 or so

Blacklade had its first tentative public appearance a few weeks back, when I took it along to the CMRA Workshop event as a display item. It's been taken along to a society area group meeting twice, but this was the first time it had gone into the wider world. Chiltern Model Railway Association is the federation of model railway clubs and societies in the South East of England and beyond (Indeed over the last few years they've picked up members well into the North of England, and seem to be growing into the nearest thing to a national association of clubs we have.) As well as organising the St Albans exhibition each year in January, for a good few years they've run an event for members of CMRA clubs at Watford in July. Essentially it's a bit like the demonstrators section of an exhibition - except that there is no general public, just the folk demonstrating and other club members . (There's also a programme of talks and a couple of traders) It's a good event , and I've gone for a number of years and enjoyed it (both my club and a couple of societies I'm a member of belong to CMRA). This year I decided to take something along to display, under a society banner The theory was that the layout, spread across two tables on its side, would be a demo of DCC for layout control - as opposed to DCC for loco control. I don't claim to be any kind of guru , techie, or expert, but after being involved with a club project and my own layout where all the points etc were DCC controled without a conventional panel , I suppose I must know more about it than most. With three types of point motors, and three types of decoders on view , working signals interlocked with points , and route control by macros , I was hoping there would at least be something to talk about and show. If I'm honest , I wasn't exactly knocked down in the rush . A couple of people were interested to see the working signals, and whenever a potential punter came in view I gamely launched into my "what this is all about" spiel. I'd prepared some handouts on DCC , plus a sheet giving the background of the layout and a copy of the DOGA OO Intermediate standards, but I think only one of the DCC sheets was taken. However I did get a potential invitation to demo at a show so someone must have been moderately impressed, and I think there were some tables that were quieter than mine While in theory Blacklade was there as a static item, I did bring some stock on the sly, and for the last hour and a half I turned the layout right way up and ran it . What I hadn't realised was that Bradfield Gloster Square was also going to be there , and inevitably made my little effort look like a clockwork torch in competition with Spurn lighthouse. Even worse , the gremlins came out for a carnival as soon as they saw one of the Bradfield team was watching - and no layout on the circuit runs as flawlessly as Bradfield . I think part of the problem may have been that access to the fiddle yard is tight, and it is difficult to see if all wheels are on the track - some stock may not have been on the rails when it left the fiddle yard.... Once this was sorted out, things settled down and it ran reasonably smoothly while a couple of people from the adjacent EM gauge tables were watching. The main weakness of the layout has been reliable throwing of the points - the Marcway points are very stiff , and I didn't cut adequete recesses in the cork before laying them. In the run up to the show I had done a lot of work digging out the cork around various points to free them up , and this paid dividends. I also refitted the Hoffmann point motor , which in one direction was buzzing - meaning that it wasn't moving quite far enough to work the cut-off switch . The overall result was that everything bar No 1 crossover worked every time and point derailments, except at No 1 crossover (which has teeth and likes a Hornby 31 for breakfast) stopped. In the run up to Watford Workshop I also , finally, managed to sort out various ragged edges to the ballasting , and touched in exposed cork with brown cork acrylic, as well as touching up a few bits of the hard standing. That dealt with the obvious defects - the rest of the scenic work had to wait till after Watford (and merits a separate post) One discovery was that Blacklade is most comfortably operated from a chair at the station end , with the layout set up on a pair of tables. Unfortunately the clutter in the study at home has prevented it ever being set up as originally intended - on top of the bookcases and modelling cupboard. It only ever gets set up in the sitting room with the (very basic) legs.... I also had a running session with the layout the week after Watford . One of the Bradfield crew recommended a Peco railer, which does seem to help get things on reliably in the fiddle yard. The main problems seem to be with the parcels train - the body of the kitbuilt Van B was lolling to one side enough to catch the bridge abutment and derail (I've tightened up the fixing screws on the bogies as far as I can , though one bogie is still loose) and the 31 and No 1 crossover kept disagreeing. As this is one end of the runround loop, and as at present the Hornby 31 is the loco that works the two parcels trains and the trip TTA , this is unfortunate. One solution may be to get on with the detailed body for the old Airfix 31 (not to mention the fitting of Kadees) on the theory that Hornby 31s are a little track sensitive, DMUs seem to cope, and a loco with a slightly coarser wheel profile may be better (This is in no way a problem of the track standard - it's a question of the wire from the point motor to the tie bar being a little too flexible leading to closure not being quite positive enough. A more drastic step is replace one or both Tortioses with Cobalt Blues - meaning shorter, stiffer wire, over £30 and a certain amount of rewiring work.) It's clear I need a second 31 if I'm to run loco hauled stock as a DMU-substitute - that will have to go into Pl 3 as the only platform long enough, and that doesan't have access to the run-round loop. So the Hornby 31 will still be needed, and it's not as if I'm adding an extra project to the list Also on the subject of Pl 3 , despite efforts to ease the clearances of the edging slab - through repeated rubbing with an Xacto knife handle to crush the balsa down - the 108 seems to stick , derail and somehow this scrambled the decoder. I tried to reprogram in haste, forgot that the MERG point decoder is sensitive to programming commands , and scrambled that... Reprogramming the thing requires flyleads , taking down the layout etc so that was the end of a running session. I hope this is the last time for this particular problem. Some time ago I removed the NCE AutoSwitch which was supposed to switch off the rest of the layout when programming - because it didn't seem to be doing anything. I fitted a DPDT switch instead - and that doesn't seem to be doing anything either. It looks like I have somehow created an inadvertant connection across the isolation of the programming track (the fueling point siding) . However all this meant I had an unused NCE Auto Switch in the decoder bag, so I installed it between the MERG decoder and the DCC bus. Oh and a fault book is now in operation , to identify any gremlins...

My guess - and it is simply a guess - is that the loco was still in GC livery until repainted, though it might have recieved its LNER number, simply for practical operating reasons

Looking very good indeed

I'm clear that a circuit breaker(s) should go as far up stream as possible to protect the system. So I'd put one between PowerCab and AutoSW. In theory you could put one on every board, between the connector and the bus, so that only the board with the short dropped out , but in your case that's not really relevant We seem to have pretty similar layouts , wired in a pretty similar manner

I'm working in OO and I sometimes run a pair of Hornby 153s I intend to consist pairs of multiple units where I can My layman's understanding is that if the value of the circuit breaker in amps is higher than the maximum output of the transformer , the breaker won't trip, even if there is a short. (Hence comments in the past about the "coin test"? I presume this is why NCE state that their own circuit breaker isn't suitable for the PowerCab - ie the PowerCab isn't capable of delivering enough current to trip it? I could be wrong here - electricity isn't something I claim to understand very well. But I don't want to spend £15-£20 on a PSX-1 and find that it does nothing at all because not enough current flows through a short to trip it. £1.49 for a component from Maplins is cheap enough to take a punt...

Anyone have any views on this, as I shall probably be going near Maplins tomorrow? a) will the original US-supplied transformer at 1.1amps actually trip a PSX-1? b] Will the Maplins circuit breakers do any good?

Can anyone give a bit of advice/clarification on this issue? I have a Powercab , and the power supply is the US transformer it came with, plugged in via an international plug adapter (with part of the plastic rim/ring cut away so the transformer fits - but nothing electrical exposed of course). According to the markings on the base this delivers 1.1 amps At present there is no breaker and when anything derails or goes the wrong way into a point it wipes /scrambles the display and I have to pull out the lead and reboot the system. This is an irritation , but I'm more worried about the suggestion shorts can damage the Powercab's electronics (I've seen it suggested the Powercab doesn't actually shut off power but just limits it?) So I'm thinking of fitting a circuit braker but none seem low enough ampage. The NCE EB1 breaker is specifically listed on the nearest DCC supplier's website as "not suitable for the Powercab". (Thought EB1 was a rebuilt Shildon-Newport electric but there you go...) The PSX-1 seems to have a minimum trip level of 1.27 amps - so I don't think that will work either? All I can find - dimly remembering a comment long ago that Maplins sold fast acting circuit breakers that were far cheaper than the specialist commercial products - is this: http://www.maplin.co.uk/auto-reset-circuit-breakers-493 The 1.0amp version would presumably be low enough to trip with a 1.1amp transformer? Even if the Powercab trips faster , it would presumably act to protect the Powercab itself from a sustained short - which is my biggest concern at the moment I'm an electrical ignoramus so I may be missing something fundamental here... For clarity , the layout is 2 boards, each 4'3" long, the traction bus is two lengths of solid core mains cable , linke to the power cab panel /board connectors by bits of 0.2/24 "5amp" wire , droppers are a minimum of "3amp" (0.2/16) wire, and there is at least one and generally two droppers to every piece of rail . Interboard connection is via bulgin plugs and 7 core cable from Maplins. So inadequete gauge wiring shouldn't be an issue here. I'd be grateful for comments/views /help before I drive to the nearest large town with a branch of Maplins to buy one. Or even 2 (one for each board)

Quite apart from copyright, scan/copy may well result in slight variations in size, so the panel overlay may not match the underlying layer , never mind the variation in colour tone and density/finish . You may be better off just buying a second kit - I reckon there's enough extra parts in the kit to overlay one brake vehicle but that's as far as you'd get without extra material. I've got a StreetLevel Ashburys kit myself as my Streetlevel cardboard Met Bo-Bo can't cope with 2 Ratio coach kits at 100g each (should have added more lead inside the loco). Bogies on the Ashburys seem to be drawn as 7' wheelbase - 247 do a cast whitemetal GW 7' bogie which looks close and would supply useful weight as well as getting it very low down . But this is a very long way down my very long "to do" list....

To be honest , I expected the link was going to a "recipe" for varnished teak finish or a photo of a model painted by someone very very good. This is the first time I've seen someone say that Hornby's current teak finish is unacceptably poor , and suggest it can be bettered by a handpainted finish . That does beg the question " how? -using what method/"recipe"?" and whether the techniques will deliver a result better than Hornby's in the hands of an average/ better than average modeller , or whether only a professional painter of the calibre of Steve Barnfield or Larry Goddard with all the kit can "get a result" I can and do paint things but I can't achieve the quality of finish of current factory finishes even on a single colour livery (I'm still trying to pluck up courage to attempt 2 colour liveries) and I rely on weathering to get me out of jail

Having accidentally found the relevant thread , it's worth pointing out that two of the three criticisms made relate to colours . In one case it's a question of red - which is notoriously problematic on old black and white photos , in the second case no reliable evidence is available to judge the state of late LNER "faux teak" since no such original finish survives and period colour material is desperately scarce and not likely to reproduce the colours accurately (if anyone wants to chase hares theres about 5 secs of archive colour footage in the recent BBC documentary The Joy of Sets which shows a post war LNER express with teak/"teak" coaches) . In the third case the RTR model matches a builder's photo of how the insignia were applied. It may turn out to be a rare varient, but it's not wrong and the suggestion it may have been changed before the vehicle entered service feels like clutching at straws Not a lot can be done to "upgrade" any of this - while the cottage industrialist in question may not personally be satisfied with Hornby's rendition of teak , the awkward fact is that about 5 generations of modellers have failed to "crack" varnished teak finish successfully (we've been trying since the early 30s) and almost nobody is going to do a better job than Hornby. Mercifully apart from one brush with LNER/ER painted brown - not teak - I don't have to face this particular issue but I'll still have one of the coaches in question when they are done in maroon. This doesn't seem to be a case of pointing out a clear error in the model (eg the fact that Bachmann's cattle wagon is a scale foot short) or offering a solution, and it's by no means certain that the criticism of the RTR model is correct. On a slightly different tack, one issue is the situation where all the rivets are present and correct , the detail is spot on and the whole thing's totally wrong. That's to say where the detail and craftmanship of individual models is absolutely right, but the overall combination is completely wrong and incredible . The afore mentioned TMD layouts are a classic example - the locos may , and often are, detailed and very accurate to specific prototype, but such a depot never existed anywhere , and looks nothing like any depot that did. For example someone recently quoted the main shed at Sheffield Tinsley (TI) as scaling out at 37' in 4mm . The typical TMD layout has an 18" long shed, often from Hornby. Stations with 3 platforms holding 4 coaches and claiming to be Euston, Kings Cross or Waterloo vanished from the hobby decades ago as absurd.... Or - for another example - the presence of brightly coloured wooden PO wagons sprinkled into BR steam era goods , when A) coal wagons generally ran in coal trains - the local pickup goods being the exception to the rule and B) post war PO wagons were severely weathered or unpainted wood . Not to mention that most post war coal trains would have had lots of 16T minerals , and that 98% of all 16T minerals had scored /damaged paintwork and streaks and patches of rust...

Richard: A word of warning - correspondence in MRJ in the last year has revealed that PVA is acidic and promotes corrosion of lead very nicely . Especially as the surface area of lead shot is so much greater than an equivalent weight of leadsheet Lead corrosion does 2 things . Firstly the corrsion products have greater volume so everything swells (as with rust) Various finescale modellers who happily filled the boilers of their etched brass kit locos with lead shot in pva have reported with horror that the boilers have started to swell and burst as the lead shot corrodes and expands inside them. This will probably happen inside your chassis moulding over the next 2-4 years Secondly the corrosion product of lead is white lead, a highly toxic heavy metal product , which takes the form of dust - easily inhailed. When the Victorians used white lead in paint it did serious harm to those producing the white lead, and to painters , and there are very strong warnings today about using masks and avoiding sanding and dust when stripping old painwork which may use lead based.pigments Use superglue, use araldite, but don't use pva with dust shot....

A very long shot - but I believe one LNWR coach carried blue/grey - an ex WCJS 12 wheel diner or sleeper -which was converted to a cinema coach for training purposes , and lasted in departmental stock into the early 70s, carrying blue/grey . This comes into the "believe it or not " category, but I think I saw a photo somewhere in robertcwp's flickr stream

The largest category of late survivors into blue/grey among passenger coaches were ex LNER buffets , with two Gresley buffets making it into 1976 and a Thompson buffet lasting as late as 1978 Small numbers of LMS and LNER design sleepers survived until 1971-2 (though they may actually have been built after 1948) Amongst NPCS , the Maunsell Van Bs and PMVs survived until 1986, and Stanier/Period 3 LMS BGs into the early 80s

This is a quick posting , just to record that there's been a bit of progress with Set 2 since I last reported on it , but mainly in the hope of flushing out some info to resolve a problem that is delaying progress: Here is the underframe of the Brake 3rd (the composite is identical) - I have played about with contrast on the image so you can see the framing . Posed on it is a Comet LMS battery box casting Two problems are immediately apparent . Firstly, the battery box casting is just a little bit longer than the gap between the cross members . Secondly, there is a cross member down the middle of the coach. The only photo I am aware of showing a MR suburban as converted to electric light ( in Historic Carriage Drawings 2: LMS) shows a vehicle with a centre mounted battery box, and a flat centre section to the trussing- an example of the sets produced for the London area, which differeed in this respect (and presumably therefore had a different layout of underframe cross members) There's also the question of the large gas lamp pots on the roof . Were these removed on conversion to electric light? I did ask the question in what seemed like the appropriate existing thread, here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51824-ratio-mr-suburban-coaches/ but it didn't draw any response Since then I've had another look at the various drawings in HCD 2 . Two things are obvious - battery boxes were always mounted to floor level , and LMS battery boxes are exactly the same size as LNWR ones. Both comprised two compartments for the batteries. Except that on some 65' WCJS clerestory stock there are two half-length battery boxes and probably some 2pm Corridor stock shows a short battery box (at least the photos of the brakes do, though the drawing doesn't) The only solution I can see at present involves sawing the Comet casting in half in a mitre box , and making good the missing side with 20 thou plasticard to produce 2 x single compartment battery boxes, one of which can be installed either side of the centre cross member. From first principles , this is the only way the LMS can have done it...... Is any one able to shed any (electric) light on this one? I can't make up the underframe till it's settled, and I can't do the roofs until I know if the centre lamp pots should be there or not. In the meantime , the coaches have reached this point, with partitions, seats and weight installed in the brake. For the composite, I have made up a partition with lead sandwiched between plasticard (these were essentially all firsts with additional partitioning to narrow the third class compartments) I've also drifted into yet another project , which will be written up in due course - converting a Replica BG to an NRX container van using a Hurst Models etch I bought second hand years ago (The BG was an ill-thought out impulse purchase at Peterborough 2 years ago, so this is another nil cost /clear the cupboard project) On the credit side, the Dapol LMS nongangway lavatory brake third is finished, except for a bit of weathering

It's in fact a reasonably accurate N32 Felix Pole 20T mineral , built for hire to private owners to "encourage" them to modernise their fleets, though it's a less refined version than the ex Airfix model. All it needs is a Parkside 12' wb RCH underframe and maybe a bit of thinning of the top edge , plus suitable painting/weathering. Hornby's S C (Stephenson Clarke) livery may well be authentic, though others (eg Norstand Grimsby) weren't

I remember that when DOGA started in the mid 90s , it did call for improved specification OO models and NEM pockets were one of the items mentioned. However I don't remember any real emphasis being placed on that particular item on the shopping list - most of the effort went into pushing for better wheels than the then current Hornby and Lima efforts - and I certainly wouldn't claim "it was DOGA what done it". I don't think the idea originated with them - it was one of those things which was cited in the 90s when comparisons were being drawn between the specification of US and Continental HO models and contemporary British outline RTR (along with working lights, all wheel pick up, centre motor drive, plug in sockets for DCC decoders etc...). I think Hornby may have started to offer NEM pockets on new RTR after they bought the wreckage of the Rivarossi Group and gained a significant presence in the Continental HO market . Certainly it predates their high spec coaches, the first ones of which were the Gresleys (the Mk3s have fixed tension locks). With Bachmann it must have started at least as early as the first of the current Mk1s , and possibly a little ewarlier - say a little after 2000 . Just about the first British outline model to have NEM pockets was Lima's 156, but Lima chose to mount them just above rail level , and to supply the model with Roco close couplers fitted as external couplings , which provoked quite a lot of modern image modellers to ask "so what's the point of that??" I think the driving force behind it was the long standing discontent with the tension-lock , especially in its old Volvo Bumper form , which is what you got from Hornby and Lima in the 90s. An NEM socket allows you to get the tension lock off easily . I became involved with a club layout group around 2001, and there was a very strong groundswell of opinion from other members in the group that Kadees should be the standard coupling on the new layout - as far as I recall it was taken as read that they should be mounted at the HO height. This may have been influenced by the fact a number of the group had recently been involved with a US HO layout, which used Kadees. I have a feeling quite a lot of those using Kadees at the time may have been modern image modellers, probably for similar reasons 298 I don't recollect a problem. Certainly I saw big Bachmann coal bogie hoppers running several times without any difficulty on that project . I've never owned any of the beasts myself, so I'm a little hazy as to details , but I think the wagons have NEM pockets - you fit the supplied "scale coupler heads" within the rake, and either the supplied tension locks or your own NEM Kadees at the ends . The ability to switch couplers in seconds so that a Kadee fitted vehicle can be retrofitted with a tensionlock if you need compatibility with someone who uses tensionlocks is a significant plus for the pockets

Just to round off a couple of projects - and prove that I do occasionally finish things as well as starting them, here are some hasty shots of the Met Bo-Bo and the Set 1 coaches at the DOGA AGT . Two coaches proved a little too much for the card loco , though one was easy enough - at 100g+ each this is not too surprising This one was taken in it's working environment before weathering and lettering - also before I fitted gangways to the inner ends : Somewhere along the line I managed to lose the moulding for one pair of gangway ends . The work around for this was to fit the Ratio mouldings at the outer ends - representing retracted gangways - and working gangways to the the inner ends . I had a packet of MJT "British Standard" gangways in the bits box, possibly bought for use on a Mainline LMS BG which didn't need them in the end, so I found a use for them here. Despite fitting the shortest possible Kadees, there is still about 3-4mm gap between buffers and the final result is a little more reminiscent of Hornby tinplate than I'd like, but at least there is no tell-tale gap between corridor connectors Numbering and lettering is from some Modelmaster WR and LMR sheets cut up to get the required numbers. I have heard that HMRS have problems obtaining transfer paper for their Pressfix range - certainly their stand at Ally Pally did not have any BR 1948-65 coach lettering sheets so I was driven to improvise from what I could find in the Modelmaster range. I'm indebted to Bill Bedford for BR (E) numbers for the ex M&GN coaches surviving in 1952 . As none of the brake composites survived that long - presumably because their small guard's compartment wasn't ideal on a line where the main passenger traffic was holiday makers - I've used a number very close to that of the surviving brake thirds. The roof was originally painted in Railmatch Centro grey (because I have a jar and have no real need for it). This didn't look quite right , so it was overpainted with a 50:50 mix of acrylic Railmatch Roof Dirt and Frame Dirt, with a touch of Tamiya Flat White to lighten it. I brushpainted the sides with satin varnish to even out the fininsh(I couldn't face masking up the windows , and after 3 brushpainted coats on the body there seemed little point spraying the varnish) More or less the same acrylic mix ,very heavily thinned, was applied to the sides , working down, and drawn off where it gathered, and a similar mix, with a bit more brown, to the underframe. I'm satisfied with the result

As an active member of DOGA I remember the debate on MREMag and elsewhere that led to the standard being issued. It was very obvious from the contributions that the vast majority of those using Kadees on 4mm British outline models were mounting them at the height recommended by Kadee for their HO coupler range . Most of the models sporting NEM pockets had them at the height laid down in NEM 362 - but some didn't , particularly from Bachmann , and this was causing some frustration In other words there was a pretty clear consensus amongst users, and most of the RTR models involved were in line. However, some folk in that debate were attempting to throw dust in everyone's eyes and deflect the complaints about deviant NEM pocket heights with the old cry "you can't say that's the wrong height, because there's no standard for OO..." Why they wanted to divert the debate into the sand trap I don't know, but it did seem that a few people didn't want to see a clear and consistant agreed position for 4mm RTR emerging (They were'nt arging for a different height , just saying that nobody was allowed to say any particular height was right or wrong - not a constructive approach) Very soon afterwards there was a standard for OO, reflecting the clear consensus of users expressed in the debate, and as far as I'm aware all subsequently introduced RTR featuring NEM pockets has had them at the standard height There are really 2 issues here - what height should NEM pockets be on 4mm RTR , and what height should Kadees be mounted at on 4mm stock . In the case of NEM pockets , there are other types of coupling potentially involved - eg some may wish to use Roco close-couplers between coaches , or standardise on a specific type of tension lock. The height of tension locks is a standard that long predates NEM pockets on British models, and the fact that Bachmann had to produce a second, cranked version of their NEM tension lock for their Mk1s because the NEM pocket is too high speaks volumes.. I can't see any real scope for a deadscale UK knuckle coupler when there is an existing very reliable and effective commercial product already available at a modest price . While Kadees may not be a totally accurate model of the real thing, they look very like the buckeye and BSI Tightlock couplings on real coaches and MUs - and no other type of coupler available looks even remotely like the real thing

It's worth pointing out that there is in fact a standard for the position of NEM pockets on 4mm stock: it's here: http://www.doubleogauge.com/standards/couplings.htm This was issued a few years ago, after a debate on MREMag on this issue where the general consensus of 4mm users for mounting at the HO height was being clouded and disrupted by the usual cry "there's no standard for OO so you can't say it's wrong!". DOGA promptly issued a OO standard , which mirrors NEM362, and copies have been sent to the RTR manufacturers : I understand they have all indicated that they would follow it . Obviously models tooled before 2007 where the NEM pocket was at the wrong height are still not compliant , Bachmann Mk1s being the most glaring example. For Bachmann Mk1s I've followed a tip from 34C of this forum (I think) , which is to force into the box the metal coupler head of a Kadee no5 and retain with superglue. I found it necessary to file back end of the "spade" on the coupler head (which would normally fit over the circular raised moulding in the draft box) and to hack away a little at the side of the pocket to get the coupler head in far enough. This , obviously , results in a perminantly fixed Kadee but it comes out at the right height. I've done this on outer ends (I run my coaches as 2 car sets)and used the Bachmann NEM plastic steampipes as coupler within the set. This closes up the coaches and eliminates the gap between corridor connections

Despite having two sets of coaches on the go already , I seem to have drifted into starting a third. Admittedly the LNWR set is almost done - just a bit of weathering still to do , and the new project is supposed to be a quick win.... When, early this year, I decided to use various steam era kits and bits I had accumulated to operate a steam period on Blacklade I quickly found I was very short of brake coaches. As money was tight at the time , I looked for the cheapest options to plug the gap and bought a Ratio MR suburban brake 3rd and a Dapol CKD LMS non-gangwayed lavatory brake third. The latter cost the princely sum of £9.30 at St Albans show The original idea was that this would run with an unbuilt BSL kit for a Gresley steel composite. It was only later, on digging the BSL kit out of the cupboard, that I found that it was a corridor coach. Plans have since been revised , and I now intend to get a maroon Hornby Thompson CL when they are available in a few months time to pair with the LMS brake. The BSL kit will ultimately be paired with a Mailcoach/Kirk Tourist Brake third open kit which I bought at Ally Pally As a CKD kit this ought to be quick. However there are various improvements to make asit's an old model. I won't give a blow by blow account, as the ground has already been covered here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64375-Dapol-ex-lms-non-corridor-lavatory-coaches-a-review-of-sorts/ SE Finecast flushglaze was sourced at Ally Pally, and fitted with UHU. This is a substantial improvement. It's necessary to carve away from behind the curving "rail" at the brake end to get the glazing in. Arguably I should have taken this "rail" - actually the toilet filler pipe I believe - right off and replaced it with some .45 handrail wire standing proud of the end . But by this time I'd painted the ends , and I wasn't sure of my ability to form the necessary curve neatly and accurately - so I chickened out on this. The alarm gear on the other end is a bit flat. I'm sure etches and detailing bits must be available to do a better job (from Comet?) but I didn't have any and chickened out again. Arguably you could replace the moulded handrails on the sides in wire - but that would have meant a complete respray , and one attraction of the CKD route is a finish to RTR factory standard. The number is applied on the left hand side , and has no suffix letter. The Modelmaster Ms I had were visibly not in the same font as Dapol used on the coach, so I couldn't add them. Numbers on the left applied from mid 1949 to late 1951 according to Parkin's book on Mk1s : lack of the origin company suffix letter points to the first year or so of BR liveries, so as produced by Dapol the finish represents a vehicle repainted in 1949-50 I did tackle the roof . The coach is supplied with the roof from the composite , so most of the holes for the vents are in the wrong place . I fitted ventilators into those holes that were in the right place, lined the moulding up against the drawing in Historic Carriage Drawings Vol 2 LMS , drilled pilot holes in the correct places , and filled the wrong holes with filler, which was sanded down with an emery board. Two and in some cases three applications were needed to get the holes filled absolutely flush. The new holes were then opened out with a larger drill and the vents fitted , with solvent/cement applied from the underside of the roof. The underframe was reworked largely in line with the pdf linked in the thread above, but I retained the truss rods and therefore the moulded regulator. Coachmann in this thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/67996-making-use-of-Dapol-lms-coach-kits/ demonstrates sawing the back off the misplaced battery box and reusing it (they're tight with their brass in Lancashire). I tried, but my razor sawblade was too wide to allow me to get it in between the truss rods to make the horizontal cut . The plastic moulding had to be carved out, and as I had a Comet battery box casting I glued it back to front behind the moulded representation of the battery box front . Since most of the detail was at the top, and is therefore hidden by the solebars , and the whole thing is painted black anyway, this bodge is not visible . Comet whitemetal LMS buffers , vacuum cylinders and dynamo and etched V hangers and crossframes were added with superglue. Kadees have been added to the bogies :

Mk1 BG or Mk1 BSK? I'm not sure its a full brake, even though Transpennine had the only BGs in any version of Regional

Mk2D - Mk2F are aircon coaches and have very different window shapes. All the Mk2s in the photos are non-aircon - I'd be extremely surprised to see aircon stock in DMU substitute sets. More critically here Mk1s were built with vacuum brakes , though some were later fitted with airbrakes. Early Mk2s were vac braked , though by Mk2b they were definitely airbraked (not sure about Mk1a). Therefore the chances are that mixtures of Mk1s and Mk2s must be early built Mk2s with vac brakes - what Bachmann call Mk2Z. Not a guarantee - air braked Mk2s could work with Mk1s converted to airbrakes.

First photo - 31320 , Mk1 TSO? SK? , Mk2 of some description , probably TSO vac brake Mk2?? Second photo: first coach Mk2 , not a brake , not sure if an all first or a TSO, though I think it has a yellow cantrail stripe (=all first) Third photo: 31 252 , Transpennine livery Mk1 - , looks like a brake First link : 31 320 Mk1 - all second (TSO or SK), Mk2 TSO , Mk2 Brake (probably BSO) Since first photo and first link show the same loco on the same day, the set is presumably the same.... Second link: Mk2 first - we can't see if its a BFK , or FK or FO as only the first half is visible Third link - 47 461 + 3 x Mk1 . Brake leading (BSK? BSO? - not a BCK though), followed by all second (SK? TSO?) Fourth Link - 47 in sector plus 2 x Mk1 BSK (or BSO?) at Barnstaple. Weird ! [edit - 2 x BSK] Fifth link - 47 373 + 3 x Mk1 . Formed TSO or SK, BSK or BSO, TSO or SK . (Notice a 3 coaches have solebars - Mk2s don't , no coach has a yellow stripe at cantrail, so no first class accomodation)