D869

Thanks Steve, I'm intending to leave the lower half of the sides as etched. I realise that the beading should be proud of the panels and that the etch is a bit of a compromise here (it just has etched lines on either side of the beading - the panel centres are not etched) but I think it would be easy to overdo this because the lower beading is VERY thin. Here are a couple of pictures of the vehicle that I'm working towards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/15173680243/in/album-72157603653607671/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/15791244841/in/album-72157603653607671/ I've just measured the sides. The answers were a bit variable but I suspect it's 12 thou or possibly a bit thicker. It's nickel silver though, not brass but I'd probably choose brass if I were etching one myself. BTW, a discussion on the BRCS Yahoo group identified the location for the photo above as Keighley Regards, Andy

Thanks Rich. I do like a bit of history for early kits. Oops.

TomE and Andy Stroud (of Ropley and Blueball fame) on here are the only people I know of who have actually done what you are talking about. Not sure if either of them will be tuned in to this thread though. The only other one that I know that my be in the same ballpark is the Leamington and Warwick club's Kineton layout but if I've understood correctly they have devised their own standard which is not the same thing that you are proposing. There was a short discussion on here but nothing specific about standards... http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/103921-kineton-smjr/ You'd think there would be a finetrax or finescale N forum someplace but I don't know where. One final thought on the subject of gauge widening... if you use 2FS Easitrack with 'N' wheels then you are getting 0.42mm of gauge widening. Regards, Andy

Thanks Nigel. I did have the feeling that these kits probably had a bit of a story but I couldn't find much about Mallard online and no mention at all of any 2mm versions. It would be interesting to know when they were produced. Cheers Pete.

I don't think that necessarily follows. It just proves that 2ft radius works, not that a smaller radius can't work. I do think that you are now faced with the same decision that anyone contemplating a roundy roundy faces - do you push the boundaries or stick to what is known to work? If you want to push the boundaries and get it wrong then that will be a lot of work down the drain. You really need to find out where the boundaries are and I'd say that the only way to do that is by testing it. It is not a simple question of, say 600mm OK, 590mm not OK. There are many factors that have a bearing on the outcome, such as... The angle you are turning through - 180 degrees is probably more difficult than, say 90 degrees The stuff you want to run - stock with 8 wheel bogies being more helpful, but what is the lest helful thing that you want to be able to run in terms of long rigid wheelbase? Clearances on your stock for footsteps etc Wwhether your couplings can cope with the curvature Length of train Speed of train Friction of the bearings, friction of the wheel on rail (which increases as radius reduces). To start with this will make stuff slow down. In extreme cases you will pull the whole train off towards the inside of the curve. Gauge widening - we have not mentioned that yet but it is one technique for helping stuff to get around curves (even on the real thing). You'd probably need to go for something like PCB track on your curves in order to use this. Perhaps cant (superelevation) and transition curves. Is the powered vehicle pulling, pushing or in the middle? I don't think anyone on here can really answer this question because there are so many variables. So if you want to build a layout with 2FS track and wheels and you want to be sure that it will work without doing a lot more testing then stick to 600mm min rad. This is the decision that most builders make because testing will take time and effort. If you want to know what the limiting radius really is for the stuff you intend to run then you will need to do some work to find out. I kind of hope that you do the testing because I'd be interested to know the outcome but I'd fully understand if (like other builders) you go for 'tried and tested'. Regards, Andy

A former member of the Midland area group recently donated his box of unfinished projects and other bits and bobs so that the group members could make use of them. I picked out a part built Gresley BG which looked like a nice model which was crying out for someone to finish it. I have a bit of a soft spot for parcels stock. Some photos and words about progress to date... The coach as retrieved - basically two sides, two ends and a floor I don't know much about its origin - this is the only clue. I assume it's a shot down 4mm etch but I'm really not sure. The scale seems to be about 1:150, so half way between 2mm and 'N'. A rather unusual choice... which made finding a roof a bit tricky. I cut the ducket and gangway ends from plain brass - a change from all that computer stuff... although I did draw the gangway ends in CAD and then stuck a print of the drawing to the brass. A gangway being assembled. No real plan here - more a case of 'make it up as you go along'. Seemed to work OK though. My original plan was to use an Ultima roof that had been in my gloat box since the 1980s. I think I bought it at IMREX if anyone can remember that far back. Unfortunately when I measured it I found it was pretty much right for 2mm scale and about 2mm too short for this kit. Instead I decided it was time to get to grips with 3d curves and then got Mr Shapeways to produce the goods. Still needs some sanding though - admittedly the 3d printing artefacts run in the same direction as the planking beneath the covering of the real roof but I think the finish is too rough. A somewhat ropey shot of the coach so far. The underframe fittings are a combination of 2mm Association and Ultima stuff. The guards footsteps still need to be done from scratch. The roof fits width and length-wise but I didn't try to fit it to the top profile of the etched coach end. Instead I used the prototype profile so I need to modify the etched end to fit the roof profile... which would have been easier if I had left the gangways off until later. Makes a change from my usual over planning. Oh, and it will be a 'BGP' - or pigeon van if you prefer because these lasted longer than the 'pure' BGs.

I don't know that it is written on a tablet of stone anywhere, but the usual rule of thumb is about 2ft radius. That doesn't mean that smaller radii won't work. If you don't have anything with a long rigid wheelbase (e.g. a 9F) then that's one less thing to cause problems. I'd still say that using such radii for 2FS wheelsets with main line stock and train lengths is pretty untried so it would be worth (for example) re-laying your test bed layout with whatever track you decide on and then trying full length trains with suitable wheels at scale speeds to see if you get any issues. WIth drop-in wheels, you can always put the 'N' ones back again if it doesn't work out. As the dpgibbons pointed out, if you choose 'N' wheel standards then you can nail down a load of Streamline in the off stage areas. If you choose 2FS then your pointwork will look better, particularly when viewed (or photographed) end-on. Regards, Andy

Not sure if you've seen it, but if not then you may want to take a look at Blueball Summit http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/82477-blueball-summit/ and Ropley http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/105616-ropley-mid-hants-railway-in-n-gauge/ As you said, sticking to diesels means that conversion is an easier proposition. It will still cost and take time though. Most things are straightforward with either dropin wheels or reprofiled wheels but I've found that some RTR wagons a bit problematic with regard to the replacement axles not turning freely. It may be down to the precise length or the pinpoint cone angle but it took some fiddling and swapping to get these wagons rolling properly (Farish TTAs). I think that Keith Armes is the chap you are referring to. I'm sure that he will be very happy to talk to you if you contact him. Curve radii... I can't think of anyone who has tried this for a standard gauge main line layout. It certainly goes against the recommendations but that doesn't mean that it can't work. It will involve compromises with coupling distances and other things to achieve the required bogie swing or sideplay. I would strongly advise starting out with something more limited - maybe a subset of your plan or a different plan altogether. Regardless of how much advice you get, you WILL make mistakes and it WILL take longer than you expect. Good luck! Regards, Andy

Very sad to hear this. My first visit was in 1983 and I've been most years since then either as an exhibitor or a punter. I've always enjoyed it and found it to be a good quality show so thank you to the organisers for all of those shows. Best of wishes with the new format. I will keep my eyes out for news of the location and content of next year's show. Regards, Andy

No, I was allowed to turn around once in each hour Actually, I asked for a spot against the wall because I had those big plastic photo display thingies and I'd checked some pictures from our previous Chelford outing and I spotted the picture rail on the wall... otherwise goodness knows how I would have displayed the photos. I have most of them on my tablet but it usually takes me quite a while to locate a specific photo if someone asks a question. I'm looking forward to doing a second class 22 but I really need to get some other stuff off my workbench first. Just now there is quite a lot of primering and sanding of 3d printed bits going on when the weather allows. Regards, Andy

Cheers Andy. I'm intending to stick with the approach that I used for my other class 22 - the Worsley kit on an Atlas MP15 chassis. It does run very well and my previous experience of Dapol stuff has been pretty variable. I haven't picked a prototype yet but the plan is to try to make life less difficult for myself this time by choosing one that needs fewer changes from the kit as designed. I have quite a few other things to get off my workbench first though, but an extra class 22 (or two now) is definitely on the 'to do' list for Hayle. Regards, Andy

Yesterday I took all of my various Hayle related bits and pieces to the Supermeet/Skills day at Chelford. It was a great day but it's fair to say that I was ready for some sleep by the time I got home again. I got a bunch of my research photos printed by one of the online companies. I hadn't actually realised just how many I'd managed to hoover up while researching Hayle. The ones that fitted into the display hangers were probably less than half of the ones printed... and there were still a good few that I did not print. Apart from being an opportunity to have an enjoyable day rabbiting on about my own interests to anyone willing to listen it was also a good chance to see how the shunting tractor performed over the course of a full day's operation. It was still working at packing up time so there were no major breakages although it did exhibit some rather odd behaviour late in the afternoon that will probably be tricky to pin down because I predict that it will perform perfectly when I try to make it do the same thing back at base. I wired up the 'main line' for locomotive operation on the day before the show but lots of people were asking questions about how it works so the lid was being lifted frequently and the loco didn't spend much time actually being used. Laurie Adams spent a good while chatting about shunting tractors so it was great to compare notes. Laurie and a few other people had a go at driving and quite a few people declined to have a go when offered. I also picked up another Worsley Works class 22 kit from Mr Doherty... and found a third for a very reasonable sum on the bring and buy stand.

Maybe so. There is a thread on the SW forum about deterioration of FUD over time, UV and oxygen are both put forward as potential factors. I use a lot of FUD/FXD so I hope the issues affect just a few bad batches but definite info about the nature and extent of the problem is hard to come by. All I know is that I've seen it for myself so it definitely does happen, but not to every FUD model. I also know that some sprued FUD things that I bought and never got around to using have gradually parted company from their sprues over time. They have been kept away from the light in their original sealed bag. So I will use plenty of FUD but will remain cautious about it being (or becoming) brittle when used for parts with small cross sections. Just to be not fully off topic - I was hoping that HDA might be an alternative for some situations, both in terms of not being brittle and in terms of being a dark colour in places where the need for handling may cause paint to rub off. Regards, Andy

Yes it can be flexible but in thin sections I've found that it snaps too easily. We're definitely in the easy snap range of sizes here. I also think that it becomes more brittle with age and I've heard of people having done wagon chassis in FUD that are fine on assembly but have not stood the stand the test of time. Finally and indisputably... FUD is not black. Regards, Andy

I tried fitting my experimental bogie frames to the intended vehicle this evening. The HDA one seems a bit too flexible and tends to look a bit wonky in relation to the rest of the vehicle. No amount of tweaking seems to get it right all around. The detail resolution and surface finish look good though. The nylon one is noticeably straighter where it is supposed to be straight and seems to 'sit' correctly as intended. The surface looks gritty and the detail is blurred though. So both have promise but neither is perfect. HDA has rather less promise since yesterday's announcement. I'm wary of FUD in the context of clip-on replacement frames - these things are subjected to quite a lot of prising, gripping and other types of persuasion when being disassembled from the vehicle and I'm not sure that FUD would stand up to that kind of abuse. Even the original RTR frame moulding lost part of one of its clip sockets while I was taking it off today. The Form 2 Drewry looks good to me - the footplate in particular seems less wavy than the HDA version. How bendy is the Form 2 grey resin in comaprison to HDA? Regards, Andy

I guess we will just have to try things out and see what works and what doesn't. My stuff is for 2mm scale so 1mm wall thickness will rule out a heck of a lot. My most recent experiment was for a replacement bogie frame. I had it printed in HDA and black nylon but SW complained about the thickness for nylon. The point in question was between the securing clip slot and the edge of the part so not much scope to make it fatter without messing up wheel clearances... although it printed OK with 'print it anyway'. The HDA version printed with no warnings about thickness. I don't know what the answer is just now but SW have ruled their HDA out of the equation. I'll certainly be exploring the Form 2 route to see how it works out. It won't be for a while yet though. Regards, Andy

I've only recently tried out HDA and found it pretty promising for some things so it's bad news that they are discontinuing it. I think that similar stuff can be had elsewhere - for example by 3d print services with Formlabs Form 2 machines... but at the moment that's just a theory - I have yet to try sending one of my designs elsewhere. A few people have mentioned 'issues' with HDA on the Shapeways forum but whether this has any bearing on their decision is not clear. I don't think anyone has been specific about the issues. My only issue was a missing corner but it wasn't in a critical place on my model. Regards, Andy

Glad it went well Pete - looks like a really nice day from your outdoor photos on the other thread. Regards, Andy

Aha - multicore in various different varieties by the metre. Never come across them before but I will give them a try. Seems to have a model railway hobbyist focus too, so lots of potentially useful things with fewer irrelevant items to wade through. Thanks. Regards, Andy

Thanks all. I think we are thinking on the same lines. Find something close and then chop off the bits you don't want. I'd keep in mind that stuff intended for installation into ducts or walls etc though (e.g. alarm cable) is not designed to be repeatedly flexed like, say audio or video leads... so don't for handheld controller cables or removeable baseboard to beaseboard cables. Regards, Andy

Not sure if I was clear earlier, but I wasn't really referring to 'layout wire' (multi strand). I was referring to more special purpose cables. Today I was after some cable with multiple cores, each insulated from each other but all wrapped up in a single bundle with an outer casing. Anyway I've sorted that one out now for not too much money by buying a ready made lead from RS and I will chop it up. I also noticed that RS sell ribbon cable in 5 metre lengths - this is very handy stuff for cabling to and from Arduinos and such like so I bought some of that too. Regards, Andy

Sounds like the sort of place that is disappearing fast. We used to have a small electronics/electrical shop that catered for hobbyists but they shut down... probably due to competition from Maplins when they opened up locally. I also have a stash of layout wire in many colours, much of it from the pre-Maplins shop. Sorry but car wiring is a bit chunky and oily for a multiway handheld controller lead which is what I'm doing just now. Regards, Andy

I'm sure you are both right, but... I am quite wary of buying from China (or from Chinese eBay sellers pretending to be in the UK). I have done it. Sometimes it has gone well, other times not. ... and I don't want to find houseroom for 48 or 98m of cable that I will probably never use... but won't throw away on principle. At the moment I've decided to solve my immediate need by buying a ready made male to female 8 way mini DIN lead from RS and chopping it in two. Eventually i will replace the connectors with some more robust and highe quality full size DIN ones. Regards, Andy Regards, Andy

This is the kind of thing that I would go to my local Maplins for but I fear that strategy won't work quite soon (or probably already won't work if I want something specific). My post-Maplin strategy for most electronic bits is to go online to the likes of RS. This works very well for many things but they want to sell cable in whole reels rather than by the metre. I'm sure there are other places online that are more hobbyist oriented. I'm also sure that such things can be found on Ebay but I'm often put off buying electronics bits that way by 'free postage'... there is of course no such thing and if buying more than one item it often amounts to 'pay twice for postage'. I guess the best bet would be a more hobbyist oriented web site that has the kind of stuff that we want (switches, cables, relays, connectors) and could potentially supply most or all of the bits needed for one of our projects... including cable by the metre... and just charge once for postage. Any recommendations? Or is there anywhere remaining in the high street that would still sell model railway usable cable? Right now I'm after some multi core cable to attach to a 7 way DIN plug but the general issue is that I'm not very good at planning ahead for this kind of purchase. Regards, Andy

Should be... although it is not unheard of for me to forget the things I intended to bring. Regards, Andy