SRman

I usually check that clearance between the con rod and the leading crankpin, and bend the connecting rod outwards if necessary. I try to keep this subtle, but I think running properly overrides appearance concerns.

Some of those last units with the reduced headcode panels also had slightly tapered windscreens. This is just visible on the unit arrowed. Nice photos, eastwestdivide.

I think none of us mind if someone points out errors on a model and lets the rest of us decide if we can live with those errors or not bother buying the item. Unfortunately, Mr S. also gets very personal with the insults (both veiled and not so veiled). He also goes on and on about the same things. yet doesn't seem to realise that he is his own worst enemy. Sure he may be correct in his criticisms of the model's errors, but there are ways of expressing these without blaming, upsetting and insulting others. I must admit I had a quiet chuckle when he posted about being banned, and had the gall to complain that someone was rude to him! Pot ... kettle ... black ...

With version 1.28, the Power Cab would support one other throttle, be it Power Cab, Pro Cab, or Cab04, etc. That was the official line. Unofficially, at least later v1.28 Power Cabs would support two extra throttles; I proved this at an exhibition where I had three Power Cabs all hooked up, with one (address #2) on the six-wire flat cable as master, and the other two as throttles #3 and 4 on the four-wire coiled cables (using an extra UTP panel for the connection). If you have version 1.65 (or have upgraded to this), then it should support three extra throttles. You can also program a slight delay on start-up for the slave Power Cabs so they don't try to fight the main command one for the initial start-up. Currently, I use two Power Cabs and aPro Cab as 'slave' throttles on a Power Pro 5 amp system, with the third Power Cab attached semi-permanently to my programming track, so acting as a stand-alone Power Cab. All I have to do is unplug the latter and plug it into a coiled cable on the Power Pro system and it, too, becomes another throttle acting as a Pro Cab. The beauty of this is there is no redundancy, apart from having a few spare six-wire flat cables lying around.

The crew seem to have abandoned SE&CR H class 0-4-4T - is that the driver or fireman by the hut, surreptitiously taking home some illicit game for his tea, left for him by his mate, the local estate game keeper? And where has the guard gone? Edit: Damn! I just realised, I should have taken off the rather prominent tension lock coupling that spoils the effect.

A little bit of fun aging one of my photos (using Paint Shop Pro):

I used to regularly attend exhibitions under the British Railway Modellers of Australia banner, where our layout was intended to demonstrate various things, including layout building, track laying, scenic work, magnetic coupling/uncoupling (Kadees), DC and DCC, and sound. I tried to strike a balance in the sound volumes, so people could hear the sounds over the general hubbub of the exhibition crowds, while not being so loud that it disturbed everyone around us. I can't say I always succeeded in getting the right balance, but at least I tried. We also had perspex screens around the layout which helped contain the sound within the boundaries of the layout - people would have to lean over the screens to hear the sounds properly. DCC sound did interest a lot of people, though, so overall, I would say that of all the things we demonstrated with that layout, around 40% of the queries I handled related to DCC sound.

I like sound, and have quite a few sound fitted locos and units. While I agree with the OP that we don't get the really deep bass chest-throbbing effects, it still adds another dimension to the model railway. There's also the added challenge of driving more realistically with the usually high momentum/inertia settings that go with the sound projects (which can be changed if so desired). I find that smoke is probably the least realistic thing, although I would love to have it if it could be made thicker (think of the problems that would cause, though! ). Smells are almost absent: I agree wholeheartedly that smells can trigger all sorts of past memories. The slightly acrid smell around electric railways with third rail (or third and fourth rail), the smell of diesel fumes, the lovely aromas of steam, coal and oil (evoked when I witnessed Simon Kohler demonstrating the then new Hornby live steam trains). I even have particular memories of the smells in the old Woolworth shop in Petts Wood; the particular combination of the detergent they used on the floors with the old woodwork and other scents they used all bring back pleasant memories of the trains running just behind the store, my grandparents and Petts Wood station itself, with the high sided steel footbridge and long stairs up to it. Mind you, the smells of steam, coal and oil can also remind one of the gritty embers and coal dust flying into ones eyes ... No, sound isn't perfect, but I like it, and it is getting better and better as we learn more (and the experts who create the projects learn more).

With so much focus on the Q, could Hornby be quietly gearing up for a model of that?

My SECR H arrived from Rails today. It has duly had over an hour of running on the rolling road on analogue power, followed by the fitting of a decoder. There's not a lot of room for a wired decoder, so I decided that a direct plug-in type would be better. The only one I had left is a Hattons Mini Direct, a type which seems to be quite good for motor control. A session on the programming track showed that I needed to up the starting voltage on the decoder (CV2) which now has a value of 11 in it. This is higher than I usually have to put in, but may be because the mechanism is still a little tight. Some proper, continuous track running may improve things further. It will crawl along smoothly at low speed on step 1 of the controller (NCE Power Pro), but not (at this time) as slowly as Skinnylinny's one in his video in the thread dedicated to the Hornby H. On a different topic, I swapped a Lenz decoder into 4TC unit 404 to make it easier to consist with 416 (which already had a Lenz fitted). For some reason the headcodes on 404 didn't want to light up, so I played around on the programming track, even resorting to a decoder reset. This was made more difficult because the Lenz decoders won't read without a motor in circuit, so I was programming blind, so to speak (the Zimo MX634 decoder I had in 404 temporarily did read properly without a motor in circuit). I eventually gave up on this and took the decoder out to put it temporarily into a locomotive (I chose a DJM class 71 as the bodies just clip off easily). Once I could see what I was doing, the fix was very easy; for some reason, the decoder was set to 14 speed steps. Switching it to 28/128 fixed the headcode lights. The decoder was reinstalled in the TC and all was well.

At risk of doing another "me too" post, my H arrived from Rails today. It has duly had over an hour of running on the rolling road on analogue power, followed by the fitting of a decoder. There's not a lot of room for a wired decoder, so I decided that a direct plug-in type would be better. The only one I had left is a Hattons Mini Direct, a type which seems to be quite good for motor control. A session on the programming track showed that I needed to up the starting voltage on the decoder (CV2) which now has a value of 11 in it. This is higher than I usually have to put in, but may be because the mechanism is still a little tight. Some proper, continuous track running may improve things further. It will crawl along smoothly at low speed on step 1 of the controller (NCE Power Pro), but not (at this time) as slowly as Skinnylinny's one in his video above.

My Wilton has sound fitted and approximately 75 grams of sheet lead wrapped inside the casing, as far forward as I could get it while leaving space for the speaker. I have left the sprung rear axle as it came from the factory, and this loco has no problems at all to report. However, the rebuilt MNs are a slightly different kettle of fish, and the sprung rear axle does suffer from weight transfer (there's not much room to add weight at the front to re-balance the locos). I haven't tried anything yet, but it should be possible to replace the spring with some plastic rodding or a series of small washers. Later Bulleid models released by Hornby don't have the sprung rear axle at all.

That's MY line! How dare you sir?????

Brian, would a relatively light and free-running 4-car unit really need two ringfield motor bogies? I would have thought that even without traction tyres the Hornby unit should be capable of handling the 4 LAV single-handedly. I'm thinking in terms of 1. saving you a little money, and 2. reducing any potential problems with the motor bogies fighting each other and causing derailments of the centre coaches. Incidentally, yours looks good too.

That's exactly what I did with mine, many years ago. Lima forgot to put the holes in, so the simple answer is we have to make our own. Being on the vehicle end, if one makes a mistake or slips with the drill, it won't be too hard to disguise with a spot of filler and a little weathering, also hidden by the exhaust pipe itself anyway.

Definitely not a 2 BIL as both are Motor Brake coaches with van sections; even if both were from BIL units, one would have the corridor side towards the camera. I agree with the suggestion of SUB MBS coaches (3 SUB/4 SUB) pre-Bulleid style. There were many variations on the SUBs depending on the origins of the coaches, whether Eastern, Central or Western section (SECR, LBSCR or LSWR styles).

Adding slightly to Chris's answer, Kernow Model railway Centre were going to produce a 117 with a possibility of also making class 118 variants. However, they deferred to Bachmann's announcement of the 117, which sort of leaves the 118 in limbo for the time being. It is within the realms of possibility that Kernow could commission Bachmann to do the 118, but only time will tell on that.

Definitely Black Beetle, but get in quickly as they are no longer being made.

I have enough models to sink a battleship ... nay, a whole fleet of battleships! Do I need more? Not on your life! Do I want more? All the time. I have a large layout, still under construction, but even when it is finished, there won't be enough room for even a fraction of my collection. There are trains I still want to model - I tend to look at it in the sense of wanting the whole train. For the various SECR locos I have, I have bought rtr and built kits of suitable wagons and npcc stock, but the Bachmann birdcage coaches will add a better dimension to the trains. Other trains take longer to build up, with modern wagons like the Bachmann JGAs being bought in ones or twos over several years to spread the cost. Like several other people here, I like seeing the trains running, and I like variety. If I run out of money, I have enough to keep me going for the years to come, as well as having enough unbuilt kits to keep me entertained in those years! All I need are glues and paint to continue on. Will I continue to buy the new releases that fit with the various themes I model? Yes, until I run out of money.

Congratulations, Rick. You'll be able to combine your hobby and work and get paid for it. I hope all goes well and you enjoy the new posting.

For all the inaccuracies Adrian has pointed out, many won't actually be visible when the sets are in service on my layout. To quote Spannerman earlier, I am "happy to get models better than I could produce." My order remains active.

Have you been partaking of the imbibing of too much of the strong stuff again, Rick??

That's him, Roy. I never made the connection before, but I have made quite a few of the GS Models (or ex-GS Models) kits over the years, and still have a couple of unmade/half-finished ones too (an LT 'scooter', a 4RF4, and a CR). I have made all the variations of the RF kits - the roofs need raising slightly on those but I liked them a lot as kits, and as representations of the real thing (better in some ways than the diecast EFE ones, which also have too shallow and additionally flattened roofs). I know the ABS Streetscene range had kits absorbed from other ranges, but I seem to recall that not all of the ABS original range of bus kits were 100% accurate.

I. too, lived next to the Brighton line, in Pound Hill (the opposite side of the line to Three Bridges) for some years (not as long as Keith, though). I also have happy memories of BILs, HALs, LAVs, PULs and PANs (plus the BELs although I never rode on those). Of all of those, I always considered the LAVs as being the ugliest, with their flattened, narrow van sections and narrow cab fronts. Inside them was a different matter; I remember even as an 8 year old admiring the polished wood in the LAVs and BILs in particular. I am loving this model build and look forward to seeing the finished unit.

That top one of the 25s would be a good candidate for the 'How Realistic Are Your Models' thread if you crop out the top bits, Peter. Stunning photos of stunning models, as always.