Dixie Dean

Thinking about this a bit more, what about a driver that appears depending on which way the loco is being driven? Or is this, as Monty Python might have said, "being a little bit too silly!"

To be quite honest I suggested the opening doors just for a bit of fun, and may be because it's a sound you always get on a sound chip without it being able to reflect the actual door opening. However, the idea of the pan being able to be raised is very attractive, especially on the 92. I presume it would raise the cost as well though, Dave? How much, is the key question, and if so, would most purchasers be up for it?

Now that Bachmann have announced pantographs operated by servo, will Dave do the same, or had he already decided to do so? Also, what about opening cab doors?

Having had a look at the Bachmann Acela on YouTube I think I'd be perfectly happy with the compromise they adopted.

What we need is a compromise in the form of a realistic but slightly over engineered pantograph which stays up in contact with the catenary. Sommerfeld and Roco have been making similar ones for years out of metal. I put a Roco one on my APT, this only problem is they have two V shaped upper arms. The same with one would be great.

I would be interested as well. BW HS pantographs to date have been a real disappointment.

I'd like to confirm point 2 about the pantographs as well. That has been the weakest point of most previous electric locos and EMUs so far. Even the Class 350 was far from perfect. I too would like an accurate representation of the BWHS pantograph, that collapses and raises like to real thing, with the head staying horizontal however high the pantograph is allowed to go by the catenary.

Hi Dave. I've ordered a couple of OO gauge class 92s and was wondering how good the pantographs are going to be? Are the going to be metal or plastic? Are they going to be able to run along catenary if required (not collecting current)? Is the head going to remain horizontal at all times? Are they going to be sprung? Are they going to be realistic, with the arms looking like the real thing, i.e. one tubular and one squarer? If so, would you consider getting an over supply so that modellers like myself could add a decent pantograph to other existing models? A lot of questions, but am looking forward to your reply. Many thanks and keep up the good work.

I must admit I didn't look too closely!

Lighting. It can run light, lights both ends as appropriate, and as part of a consist, i.e. lamps on one end off. Doesn't appear to have a night mode. Does have cab lights which are controlled by switches under the exhaust cover (prises off - do it gently otherwise you may damage it).

Bif has already done one although using a Class 47 as a "mule", but it will give you the idea:

Hi Terry I spoke with Dapol and they told me that all the locos will look like the pictures above. I snipped off the short piece of lacquered wire that went nowhere. For now I've fitted the one that came with the chip. It's the standard one sent out by ESU with the chip. However, the thinner and longer speaker that DC Kits and others sell would fit more correctly: In this pictue you can see my loco with the standard speaker fitted. The bracket you can see next to the speaker is one of two that would normally be used to hold in the more correct type of speaker. There are 2 of these but I have had to remove one to get the standard speaker in. I'm sorry but I am unable to help you with the cost of the chip. Typically they are currently about £105 but an email to DC Kits should get you the exact price.

I've now powered it up and its running fine. I did, however, snip of the excess length of wire that wasn't connected to anything as the end of it was tinned and could have caused a problem.

Well Dapol are obviously aware of this and in a phone call to them say its OK. So I'll power it up and see what happens.

I must admit, my feelings are the same. The non-machine soldering isn't that great is it? First thing I might speak direct with Dapol just to get their thoughts on it prior to seeing what the others in stock at Hattons are like. I feel very reluctant to power it up without some sort of reassurance about its electrical integrity.

On end is connected to, or across, a diode D8, I think, and the other to the 3rd pin down on the right of the pins onto which the chip fits. The attached may assist.

I picked up my class 68 today (I only live 2 miles from Hattons). I'd already got a chip from Legomanbiffo. On opening up the loco I found these two coppery wires, one joining 2 points on the loco's circuit board and the other going nowhere! (just flopping about). Do you think that's normal. Should I check it out with Hattons or Dapol before powering the loco up. Any thoughts would be most welcome.

Just one other thought ... you could attach a stout copper wire as a cross member from side to side of the underneath of the helix and solder another similar wire above the track to this cross member. Some wiring ring main would probably suffice. That would get over fixing it upside down. You only need to do the bits where pantographs might snag. If you pushed the tallest loco around to test it, it might be less places than you think.

Just a thought Alan. Rather than tying your pantographs with fishing line, why not run a piece of code 75 track over the railway at any contentious points with a drop in and out at each end, i.e. a bit where the rail gets higher than the highest pantograph? A bit like the opposite of southern third rail end pieces. That way where there's reduced headroom the pantographs will just be brought down and then released when there's plenty of room for them to float. I was planning to screw brass screws into the underside of the reduced headroom area and solder the track to it so that the pantographs slide along it.

Thanks for that update, Alan. I will continue to lurk and watch with interest as your layout develops. Also very interested in anything you are doing to do with computerisation. I'm still trying to design my layout, but only have a single domestic garage to fit it in, so it's something of a squeeze. But hopefully it will all get sorted soon ...

Hi Alan, great thread and like everyone else, very envious of the space you have. Could I ask you what radius and gradient you are using for your helix? Also what range of radii are you using "in the open air"?

Thanks piranha230. The lower arm appears to be stuck in a position parallel to the adjacent bar that runs between the two insulators. Only the upper arm will raise. I presume you have one these also. Does the lower arm lock down in the flat position? How do you release it? Mine is quite rigid and I can't see any way to release it so that it can be raised.

I have an Hornby Pendolino (DCC fitted). The pantograph on it doesn't appear to be able to be left in the up position as if it were running along the catenary wire. Am I right, or is the one on my model duff? If so, as anyone on here tried to fit a Backmann Class 350 BW HS Pantograph to it, as at least those look a bit more prototypical. They can be purchased as spares as I have asked Bachmann.

Hi again everybody. I have significantly changed what I plan to do, having seen the latest version of that great layout Hillside on You tube. That was developed using three shelves around a garage with an incline connecting each, so that trains could run around and up and down. I have decided to follow this idea, but have a reverse loop at the top and bottom so that trains can go up and down with reversing. I have pretty much finalised the upper layer of my layout, but will still welcome comments and suggestions for improvement. I have posted the track plan in my gallery. I don't know whether I can improve the station area. That is the upper (North) part of the diagram. I propose to build an island platform between the tracks and a platform with station building on the south side of the tracks. Could I utilise any of the spaces around the layout for small sidings, e.g. a van depot, wood loading. The space between the station platform and the two tracks going down onto the next level (see below) is for a townscape of some sort, e.g. station building, bus terminus, car park, a couple of shops etc. and a road off in one or more directions. The 4 through tracks on the lower) (South) side of the diagram are for storing freight trains (up to 11 bogie wagons + locomotive). The sidings to the North of these are the carriage sidings. The two inner tracks are those that will drop around the garage walls to the lower level in due course. Having a complete loop at the top will allow me to operate trains around the upper level whilst the top to bottom tracks and the bottom level are built. The hatched tracks are where they enter a tunnel and pass on the next set of baseboards below, emerging from a tunnel adjacent to the garage wall, on a mountainside. The track is mostly Peco Code 75, however, due to space constraints I will have to use some Roco Code 83 curved points. I would be grateful for any comments about these and their compatibility with the Peco track.

Thanks Dave, that was much appreciated. Sorry for the late reply, but I have been away. I seemed to have stumped everyone in terms of how best to design an interesting layout within the space and contraints I have. The main problem for me has been that I will be running coaching stock like Pendolinos and I don't want these to look like they are going around toy train curves when they are ascending or descending the spirals. I did look at having a two track main line which went up from the lower level to the upper level, and back down again, but to do that you need to have a loop at both ends and fitting that it is just as space consuming as a spiral and you have to have one at both the bottom and the top. Perhaps I should have done a Rhb layout instead. Bit late now, though, I have so much UK stock!