OO gauge GWR Mogul and Prairie

[Miss Prism]

Pic of 7310  (I've reinstated the image)

[Ian J.]

I'm not too bothered about shed codes. While part of me likes the idea of them being 'correct', across a large stable of locos it's a little too much to have to pay attention to. So these days I'm more into a loco being 'representative' than 'definitive'. In that sense, 5330 is OK, as would 7310, though I'll using them for pseudo-Bristol/Pompey trains in my ficitional S&P arrangement. I'm not even sure if the prototype ever did the Bristol/Pompeys via Salisbury in real life.

[SteamingWales]

1 hour ago, Ian J. said:

I'm not too bothered about shed codes. While part of me likes the idea of them being 'correct', across a large stable of locos it's a little too much to have to pay attention to. So these days I'm more into a loco being 'representative' than 'definitive'. In that sense, 5330 is OK, as would 7310, though I'll using them for pseudo-Bristol/Pompey trains in my ficitional S&P arrangement. I'm not even sure if the prototype ever did the Bristol/Pompeys via Salisbury in real life.

 

That's fair enough. Most people probably don't care about shed codes either and I only started caring myself when starting my current project 😅

 

Depending how much research you are prepared to do it might be worth looking into whether the "true" 43xx ran where you are modelling or whether the later 63xx were more common

 

For me modelling the Cambrian Coast (Machynlleth), the 63xx is more relevant with only one 43xx allocated which was withdrawn in 1/59 whereas the 63xx lasted to '63

 

Or am I just overcomplicating everything now 😂

 

 

 

[Hal Nail]

12 hours ago, SteamingWales said:

Most people probably don't care about shed codes either

If they did care, most people would probably just change it.

 

I'm struggling to think of an easier modification (other than dropping it!) - Railtec even do 3D transfers if you dont fancy brass.

Edited May 12, 2022 by Hal Nail

[The Fatadder]

Has anyone had success improving their 43xx’s haulage? 
 

Since getting mine at Ally Pally I’ve found it completely gutless, running on a set of 2 RTR and 2 brass coaches (ok one of which is a 70ft concertina), it really struggles to pull away

[Hal Nail]

1 hour ago, The Fatadder said:

Has anyone had success improving their 43xx’s haulage? 
 

Since getting mine at Ally Pally I’ve found it completely gutless, running on a set of 2 RTR and 2 brass coaches (ok one of which is a 70ft concertina), it really struggles to pull away

Someone earlier (page 99 ish) said theirs was pulling 30 wagons so suggests there is a specific problem with yours?

[tommyliam021]

I love having a local shedcode, really finishes a model off for me. Generally I like to go for those of the 87F and 87G variety.

[The Johnster]

Shedcodes are important to me, and as all the motive power on my branch would have been supplied by one shed had the branch existed, all are the same, 86F Tondu. 

 

 

[Grimfool]

On 05/02/2022 at 23:47, Harlequin said:

A while back I worked out how to bypass the electronics on the Dapol carrier board so that the decoder could drive the firebox LEDs directly:

 

In a nutshell: Chop the 8-pin chip off and connect pin 4 ground directly to pins 7 & 8, the pull-downs for the two Dapol firebox LEDs.

 

The lights now flickered under the control of the decoder rather than cycling regularly but they were still not very bright. So the next step was to improve the lighting itself. I tried a few things before ending up with the following solution:

 

I have removed the Dapol lights and their little carrier board completely and replaced them with a "super-bright orange LED". The LED is too big to fit directly behind the firebox doors and would probably look wrong there anyway. So instead it's mounted in the space where the old LEDs were and a transparent plastic light guide transmits the light up to the firebox doors.

 

I made the light guide from an old CD "jewel case": Cut out a piece 12mm by 7mm, chamfered the ends to give a kind of periscope effect and polished it using car polish:

 

The new LED is glued to the bottom of the light guide:

 

(I wrapped some fine foil around the back to help guide the light up but this might not be needed and it has the effect of making the inside of the firebox look silvery when the light is turned off - so maybe not a good idea.)

 

I connected the new LED to the common positive and both pulldown resistors of the original LEDs. This effectively provides more voltage for the new LED by halving the resistance. This is what it looks like mounted on the loco without the body:

You can see the LED shining forwards into the light guide and the chamfer at the top helping direct light back out of the firebox doors. The light guide is only 1mm thick so there's no problem with it fouling the body.

 

And with the body on:

 

I think it looks much more like a fire now than the original Dapol lighting: (Dapol in 5108 in front, my modification behind in 5109)

 

Bear in mind that the phone camera is mucking around with contrast and brightness in all these photos so they don't look the same as they do the naked eye. Sometimes brighter, sometimes dimmer.

 

 

[Grimfool]

Hi Phil,

I removed the chip from the a spare pcb board and replaced it with a connection between 4 and 7&8 but it still only works on F0 except the leds are on constantly instead of alternating. Is this what you have i.e. working from F0 or does it work off aux 1?

[Harlequin]

31 minutes ago, Grimfool said:

Hi Phil,

I removed the chip from the a spare pcb board and replaced it with a connection between 4 and 7&8 but it still only works on F0 except the leds are on constantly instead of alternating. Is this what you have i.e. working from F0 or does it work off aux 1?

Hi,

You just need to configure F0 to use the "random flicker" output in both directions. If you have Decoder Pro that's easy (on the "Lights" page) but if not, and if you are using a Zimo decoder, let me know and I should be able to give you the CV values.

 

[Grimfool]

No I have a loksound 5 with Wheeeltapper sounds

[Harlequin]

Just now, Grimfool said:

No I have a loksound 5 with Wheeeltapper sounds

Oh. OK. And I guess that you don't have access to Decoder Pro?

 

I'll try to find out how to do it in a Loksound 5.

 

[Grimfool]

Yes I do on JMRI - I use an Apple Mac mini to run my layout through Panel Pro but I have never used Decoder Pro

[melmerby]

5 minutes ago, Grimfool said:

Yes I do on JMRI - I use an Apple Mac mini to run my layout through Panel Pro but I have never used Decoder Pro

Whyever not?

It's an excellent way of keeping a roster with all the CV settings. Ideal if you need to change a few CVs to tweak a loco's performance.

[Harlequin]

11 minutes ago, Grimfool said:

Yes I do on JMRI - I use an Apple Mac mini to run my layout through Panel Pro but I have never used Decoder Pro

OK, that's the best way if you can do it because the ESU function output control is a bit more involved than the Zimo - lots of very clever options.

 

I think you want to change the Headlight[1] and Rearlight[1] settings to "firebox" on the "Function Outputs" page.

 

(Make sure you're only programming that one loco!)

 

Edited July 10, 2022 by Harlequin

[Grimfool]

Thanks, i'll have a go

[SimonMW]

I picked up 2 x Prairies - 6190 and 5150, both with 'factory' DCC (Dapol Imperium decoder I think?).

6190 works fine - DecoderPro configured with address and run in fine. Runs nicely, adjusted the accel and decel rates and done.

5150 - DecoderPro "sees" it and can read the decoder, and changing DCC address appears to be applied, but it never responds to any "go" commands on its new address. A decoder reset (4 to CV8) does a partial reset (addresses don't change back to 3, but other parameters do drop back to default), and the issue remains - I am unable to address it at all on any address, short or long. So it's back in a box and back to Hattons for a replacement :( Overall though, nice models.

[Harlequin]

6 hours ago, SimonMW said:

I picked up 2 x Prairies - 6190 and 5150, both with 'factory' DCC (Dapol Imperium decoder I think?).

6190 works fine - DecoderPro configured with address and run in fine. Runs nicely, adjusted the accel and decel rates and done.

5150 - DecoderPro "sees" it and can read the decoder, and changing DCC address appears to be applied, but it never responds to any "go" commands on its new address. A decoder reset (4 to CV8) does a partial reset (addresses don't change back to 3, but other parameters do drop back to default), and the issue remains - I am unable to address it at all on any address, short or long. So it's back in a box and back to Hattons for a replacement :( Overall though, nice models.

Before you send one back, have you tried swapping the decoders over? (Very easy with the Dapol Prairies and no risk of voiding warranties.)

 

That would tell you whether the problem lies with the loco or decoder and possibly save you from sending the loco back.

 

If you're really lucky, just unplugging and plugging the decoders might get things working.

 

[Harlequin]

On 10/07/2022 at 10:12, Grimfool said:

Thanks, i'll have a go

Hi Grimfool,

 

Did you get it to work?

 

[SteamingWales]

With the Manor now delivered by Dapol I wonder what the current status of the new 43xx is? Just looking at the original they were announced in March 2021 with the following progress paragraph:

 

"The design team are making final revisions of the CAD’s and the project will to go into the tooling shop shortly. We will bring you more news as the model progresses. We anticipate the models will be avalible in shops Q1 – Q2 2022"

 

A slightly different question too. How difficult would it be to produce the Moguls from Lot 276 (No. 7322 to 7341) now that the Manor is here. Is it just a case of taking the Collett cab and reverser onto the existing tooling (I'm probably over simplifing here) or is it a bit more complex than that?

[tommyliam021]

I hope one day they consider 9351, something about it just looks more special than the other ‘real’ moguls.

[Miss Prism]

1 hour ago, SteamingWales said:

How difficult would it be to produce the Moguls from Lot 276 (No. 7322 to 7341) now that the Manor is here. Is it just a case of taking the Collett cab and reverser onto the existing tooling (I'm probably over simplifing here) or is it a bit more complex than that?

 

It is more complex. The front end was significantly different.

 

[Hal Nail]

2 hours ago, SteamingWales said:

Is it just a case of taking the Collett cab and reverser onto the existing tooling

 

Even if those were the only differences, you cant actually just take bits of different tools and bung them together. 

 

Bachmann's 2HAP EMU comprises two coaches they already made - but they had to start again rather than just adapt what they had.

[WishIHadAName]

Still no updates on the next batch of moguls?