RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think you are wise not to use DC for the turnouts. With the lenz it can be effective on a small layout. If you have 5 turnouts numbered sequentially you can select a loco and retail the speed control via a knob and the forward reverse. While the other buttons are switched to turnout control and you can increase or decrease the address then use a F button to select normal or reverse. BUT and it is a BIG BUT. Increase that to 50 turnouts even if you can remember the address of each one there is still an number of key presses to activate each one a real pain. So the only way to do it is set up macros to control routes. Which then takes you a long way from the steam age railway. Switches either on a diagram or in a row underneath a diagram are quicker and simpler. Don My thoughts entirely! I enjoy technology, but there's a happy compromise for me. And I found it with KL1. It worked well, so I'll stick with it. I have enough of a problem remembering the loco addresses! Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Converting all your stock to 3 links is a bit of a pain in the backside if I am honest, and quite a costly exercise too. Kit built stock is easy because there is usually a decent sized slot to feed the coupling hook through and room behind the buffer beam to locate the spring and split pin (if you wish to have the couplings sprung). It's the RTR stuff that is a pain because it means drilling, filing and hacking the bejesus out of the buffer beams and area behind (and with some Bachmann locos, that is solid metal) and then either getting lucky and having space to add the spring, etc., or cutting the back of the hook and then glueing it in place with a suitable adhesive (I have taken to using a gel-style superglue). Once you have done that, in many cases there is no way back to refitting the NEM pockets so you either press on and convert all your stock, have barrier stock with two types of couplings or glue an aftermarket NEM box back onto the stuff you have converted. So, is it worth doing? For me, I really didn't like the look of the Hornby style couplings, especially when they are hanging off the front of a loco (and you sort of need couplings at both end when you have a Terminus to FY layout). Plus, with freight stock, I was always looking at wagons on finescale layouts at exhibitions and wondering why they looked so much better than mine and then it struck me; it wasn't just the couplings, it was the mounting / NEM pocket hanging down from the floor. Hornby or Kadee, that lump is there. I like hands-on shunting. I know that a lot of people think that is weird when there are ways of doing it with magnets, etc., but I like the delay that doing it by hand provides. Countless times at exhibitions, I've watched shunting performed that is done in such a bizarre hurry that I wonder if the people operating are really hating what they are doing and can't wait to get it over and done with. I am sure that part of that is down to uncoupling with magnets; they see it's uncoupled and are in a panic that it might recouple so off they go at a thousand miles an hour. Plus, the magnets themselves dictate where you uncouple. Of course, Bacup is a home layout and as such, I like to take my time and enjoy operating it and if it was an exhibition layout I would undoubtedly think differently and go for auto-couplings. But it isn't so I won't The work involved in converting the stock is not to be sniffed at; it takes time, money, patience and nerves of steel (when you are taking a pin vice and scalpel to a brand new loco). So, would I recommend it for KL2? Not on your nellie mate. Do I regret going down this road with Bacup? Not for a second but I like fiddly jobs 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 I forgot to add this shot I took to show one of my points above. On the insanely weathered mineral on the left, the NEM pocket jumps out (at me) when compared to the mineral on the right where (as with the real wagons) there is no ungainly lump under the floor. Of course, if you don't compare like-for-like then it's probably not something you would notice, and it probably doesn't bother 99% of people but when I have spent hours making a kit, I personally don't want to ruin it by glueing on some unsightly bulge under the floor that kills the looks of it instantly. Captain Controversial strikes again 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 An excellent summary of your philosophy.... And I agree that 3 link isn't for me, for a range of reasons. I'll go down the Kadee route for the goods area - I can sort out the magnet positions at some later time. Controversial? No. I think you have your own viewpoint on things and we respect that. I see exactly where you're coming from with the NEMs. I'm one of the 99% - it doesn't bother me, as I don't "see" it. Amazing, isn't it? I think that's one reason why I don't try to take the accuracy to the ultimate limit. A general "feel" of looking right is enough for me. Keep your attitude the way it is, Jason. In a lot of cases - including several on KL1 - it leads to an improvement in standards. Jeff 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freebs Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I think at the end of the day, it's your layout, so do what you want with it. I do agree with Jason in terms of looks. When he made "Rubbishtown" it was to a great standard of modelling in itself, but then he (I'm assuming here) saw other layouts and how things can be improved upon and sought to create something better, something more accurate, something a lot more scale model railway, and he's done it. If he's got the time to spend making all the 3 link couplings, then do it - and it DOES make a visual difference. I find I'm always getting inspired by something and he's starting to persuade me to try some hand built track, but life is too short for some things 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 You're right there Lee, you should do what makes you happy; we all make compromises (well, Jim-S-W doesn't ) and why shouldn't we? I've spent the last week building the missing outhouses for the lower row of houses that back onto the station. They are all but hidden from view unless you lean over at a funny angle (or remove the houses) and as such, I have not spent too much time on them and they lack any great level of finesse (the doors, for instance, are just Slaters Planked embossed sheet with no door handles or frames) but does it matter? It doesn't to me because nobody has even mentioned that they were missing up until this point (although nobody probably knew) and with so many to make (this completes them for this street of houses - 22 all told), I wasn't going to spend 3 days on each one getting them perfect. with so many buildings, corners needed to be cut but hopefully none that jump out. I look at the level of detail that you and Al have gone to with the interiors of your buildings and I really admire it; you've gone above and beyond (especially when it's not really noticeable) although for me, it was never going to happen. A couple of buildings have a rudimentary interior but they are ones with large windows where it was noticeable (station and signalbox) but there is no way on God's Earth that I was going to do the same with the mills or houses (which just have the interiors painted in black). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Lots of common sense being put forward on here.... "Do what makes you happy" is a very good mantra. There's always an almost unlimited number of things to do on a layout and priorities have to be set. I do get annoyed, though, when people criticise yet have never done anything of a similar nature themselves. Looking ahead, I KNOW I'm going to get some "criticism" over the scale of the woodwork I've got planned. But I WANT to do it like that, it makes me happy and so I'll do it! As for your houses, Jason, I'll have one or two similar places in the rear of a viaduct I have to make, or the interior of a cutting. I'll just do the best I can and unless somebody checks things out with a micro camera, nobody will be any the wiser of what I've done - except me! Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freebs Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I just went to town with the Goods shed - had a bit of fun building it. I just wish I could get it finished now. My station building is nowhere near as intricate. The inside is painted dark grey, and the window glazing is 2mm thick acyclic -so no scope for interior detail there . I think with the Goods shed, there is the scope to get a loco's eye view of the track leading into it, so there deserves to be an interior. I keep reading Jim's workbench updates and I wonder how on earth he does it… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 I just went to town with the Goods shed - had a bit of fun building it. I just wish I could get it finished now. My station building is nowhere near as intricate. The inside is painted dark grey, and the window glazing is 2mm thick acyclic -so no scope for interior detail there . I think with the Goods shed, there is the scope to get a loco's eye view of the track leading into it, so there deserves to be an interior. I keep reading Jim's workbench updates and I wonder how on earth he does it… Lee, I find it quite funny that you've been asking my advice - and you've got commendations from Jason. You must be making some good stuff to achieve that.... Maybe I'll start asking you..... Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freebs Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) *edit* I think we can all learn something from each other in this hobby and if we do something someone else can emulate, then brilliant! After reading this thread Jeff, it's made me want to go back and revisit my tunnel mouths http://www.lnrmodels.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/another-tunnel.html the trouble is, as much as I love the look of the Slaters stone, I'm loath to part with the best part of £4 for a sheet - I dread to think how much the viaduct cost you All my scratch build stuff so far has been done on the cheap, using offcuts of foamex that were otherwise destined for the skip, and hand scribing all the stonework… yes it was free, but boy was it time consuming. So there's the cost vs time aspect to this hobby too.. and I've got neither It's usually around this time of year I pack in all the modelling as I can't gather the enthusiasm, but you guys on here are just so inspirational Edited January 30, 2014 by freebs 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Shunting is going to be a bit difficult if you don't want to use three links, Jeff. In fact, the only operating you will be able to do is run a DMU in and out. Honestly, 3 links are pretty easy to use and nowhere near as fiddly as you imagine. Plus, the goods yard (where most of the coupling / uncoupling takes place) is directly in front of the main operating position and close enough to make it a doddle. I'm not exactly an expert uncoupler and it's pretty rare that I end up swearing at them (I think they are not that much harder than using Hornby couplings). Although I did have a few O Gauge wagons dangling from my coupling pole at one show, much to the amusement of my audience, I was taking so long bent over the layout that my back and hips were killing me and the pain got to much and I had to stand up, complete with 3 wagons, hhaha. Its easy really Jeff, Yea right Oh. And 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Ah, but you are sat down with Bacup; no leaning over It is easy Andy; not much worse than using a hook to uncouple Hornby type couplings (and less change of them derailing as a result) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) To add to my previous list of "lessons learned" and things to change for KL2: Better lighting in the bunker. I had 800W of halogen spots for KL. Great for SPOT lighting and, as Andy (uax6) was always saying, great for highlighting structure on the Fell. But I need a couple of fluorescent strips in the new bunker to provide a better all-round light, when needed. Wiring. Everything was labelled and accessible on KL. I will do something similar, but try and neaten it up a bit. Backscene. I need to take this seriously - especially the bit behind the Fell. The Bodge spray-can technique will get a look-in, I think. The walling will be built in the same way, with a bit more finesse, now I've had time to practise my technique. I think other features will also use the DAS block technique - including the packhorse bridge. And a MAJOR one - never got onto this with KL - buildings. Probably using Jason's mounting-board method. My brain hurts.... Hell, if these are modifications, improvements - did I get anything RIGHT with KL!!!??? Jeff Edited January 30, 2014 by Physicsman 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 By the way, here's the loco roster as it currently stands, including the addresses of all locos (which have chips in - a couple missing). All now have screw link couplings You will be tested on this when you arrive Edit - that didn't work too well; attempt 2...... That's good Jason, I try to use the last two digits even though I use a Prodigy, with the Diesels I stick to 25 for a Class 25, 47 for a Class 47etc. Yes I know a GREEN 47 is really a type 4 and a 25 is a type 2, but that works for me, for the two Type 3's I use 37 and 370. Jason having re read your bit from earlier I am thinking you are leading me the RIGHT WAY re the points. Last time I used the DCC for point control apart from the fire, I never had a diagram so I had to remember which was which. This time I am tempted to use the DCC from the hand set, still have a track plan and point No's instead of switches and about 3 miles less wiring and sleepless nights. :locomotive: And Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Lee - the cost of the Slaters stone for the viaduct probably came in at around £100. But it resulted in a major - probably THE major feature - on the layout. So it was money well spent. I'll use similar sheet (surprisingly, I've a few spares) for the next, 3 arch, viaduct. I'd consider DAS, but it doesn't look as good in 4mm. Then, of course, there's all the 2mm sheeting I've been advised to use for the buildings. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 I dread to think how much I have spent on materials for Bacup (never mind on tools, paints, etc) but it must be nearing a Grand? Put it this way, I have ordered the castellated chimney pots I need for the house; 250 of them. Cost? 100 quid, discounted! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I forgot to add this shot I took to show one of my points above. On the insanely weathered mineral on the left, the NEM pocket jumps out (at me) when compared to the mineral on the right where (as with the real wagons) there is no ungainly lump under the floor. Of course, if you don't compare like-for-like then it's probably not something you would notice, and it probably doesn't bother 99% of people but when I have spent hours making a kit, I personally don't want to ruin it by glueing on some unsightly bulge under the floor that kills the looks of it instantly. Captain Controversial strikes again Your right, I had never looked at it like that before, its so much better. :locomotive: :locomotive: Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freebs Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Ah, but you are sat down with Bacup; no leaning over It is easy Andy; not much worse than using a hook to uncouple Hornby type couplings (and less change of them derailing as a result) My method of uncoupling Hornby couplers - pick up the two items requiring to be uncoupled - wriggle about a bit, then retail -am I doing something wrong? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freebs Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I dread to think how much I have spent on materials for Bacup (never mind on tools, paints, etc) but it must be nearing a Grand? Put it this way, I have ordered the castellated chimney pots I need for the house; 250 of them. Cost? 100 quid, discounted! Good grief! I toyed with the idea of buying some Langley pots at the York show last year, then put them back and decided to go with the cotton bud version. It's a straight pot but looks ok from the other side of the room... adding a half-clay on top enhances the appearance too... 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Jeff, re the lighting, in my current dismantled Den I had 2 x 8ft Florescent in a 9ft x 7ft room. Ideal for working on the layout and you can always turn them down of off for running. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 My method of uncoupling Hornby couplers - pick up the two items requiring to be uncoupled - wriggle about a bit, then retail -am I doing something wrong? Yep, that sounds familiar! I reckon lots of people would be doing the same... Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Good grief! I toyed with the idea of buying some Langley pots at the York show last year, then put them back and decided to go with the cotton bud version. It's a straight pot but looks ok from the other side of the room... adding a half-clay on top enhances the appearance too... post-15693-0-29097300-1377089357_thumb.jpg That's a great way of representing chimney pots. But....... It was pointed out to me by quite a few people that the chimney pots used on houses in Bacup and the surrounding area are/were castellated, and that it is a key feature that to model them without just isn't right. Now I could have said 'So What?' but when you try and follow a real location (even though my Bacup differs a fair bit from reality) it starts to grate that it wouldn't be correct if you left off those castellated pots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Jeff, re the lighting, in my current dismantled Den I had 2 x 8ft Florescent in a 9ft x 7ft room. Ideal for working on the layout and you can always turn them down of off for running. Andy Cheers Andy. I may put 3 tubes in place with 2-3 spots (4 lights per cluster) on the side walls. Dimmer switch on the flus. Should allow a good range of lighting conditions. No natural lighting I'm afraid, but I'll survive! Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jason T Posted January 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 Surely EVERYone who insists of sticking with Hornby style couplers has a bit of wire bent at 90 degrees, pushes the wagons together slightly, lifts up the hooks with the wire and then pushes them apart slightly (only for them to recoulple 1 second later when you drive the loco in the wrong direction). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Physicsman Posted January 30, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 30, 2014 I dread to think how much I have spent on materials for Bacup (never mind on tools, paints, etc) but it must be nearing a Grand? Put it this way, I have ordered the castellated chimney pots I need for the house; 250 of them. Cost? 100 quid, discounted! Reminds me of all the Veissmann "gas" lams I bought for the layout pre-KL. 20 single lamps and a dozen double lamps. Cost around £500. Presently sat in a storage box. Very nice lamps, but I must have been bl**dy crazy! Here's a pic from 2010 - double lamps lit on the station platform... Jeff 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now