Eureka! Despite tooling around in Templot, I still couldn't come up with a shunting zone track formation that I was comfortable with. Being able to customise things certainly helped, but it didn't cure the problem. The root of my difficulty is that the baseboard isn't wide enough for what I want to do, largely because it only just accomodates the curve of the track even before I start adding sidings and run-rounds. So the obvious solution is to make the board wider. Quite why I didn't do this straight away I don't know, but the finger of suspicion is pointing at the industrial quantity of Chateau Screwtop in the kitchen.
So the supports for the middle level viaduct have been moved over enough to allow an extra couple of inches of baseboard to be inserted. Although the track itself will barely touch this, the extra width does let me slide things around enough to make a workable track formation (without recourse to track-building) and still have space either side for scenery. The key gain is the ability to place a run-round loop toward the back without interfering with the sidings at the front - previously I was trying to squeeze too many points into too little space.
Contrary to what I said before, I've found I can just about photograph the whole area, although it involves some gymnastics that I'm not entirely comfortable with. Still, as the air is getting slippery up in the loft now, that'll be all the modelling I'll be doing today and I can have a rest.
Finally, just a quick snap of what happens in this weather if you don't fix your track down and leave enough expansion gaps. This is (fortunately) just a section of temporary track, so it was left loose on the baseboard, but it's quite alarming how it tries to climb into the air because of the heat!
Currently On My Stereo: Les Claypool - Of Whales and Woe
(Link for this specific entry...)
While not without compromises, Bachmann's recent Mark 2 and Mark 2a coaches are products that I'll probably be happy to buy and use en-masse. Unfortunately, the key word there is 'probably' as until the widely-observed livery defects are sorted out it's a call I personally find very difficult to make.
On the real thing, the area of grey panel between the top of the window frames and the white lining is very small indeed, whilst that between the bottom of the frames and the white lining is much larger. I don't know whether we're talking five times larger, ten times larger, or what, but it's very obviously larger and these kind of proportions are something the eye is very sensitive to. As Bachmann has clearly got this very wrong indeed, the blue/grey versions of the coaches don't look right at all. I'm inclined to think that once this blunder is corrected, the products will look much more presentable, but until such time as I can see corrected examples I'm afraid the jury is still out.
Generally the standard of finish is poor on all samples I've seen, with marked overspray being common - the example pictured has the grey extending much too far beyond the white line at the coach ends. This is something I've remarked upon before, Bachmann just doesn't seem to be able to regain the sharpness of livery on coaches and multiple units that it once had. Perhaps more importantly, the standard of finish just doesn't compare with that seen on it's major competitor's coaches.
These livery issues need fixing pretty damned quickly, it's the difference between people like me buying a few dozen or none at all. What isn't needed is the usual round of official denials, effectively implying that large numbers of loyal customers are in some way retarded. That might be PR, but it's not good PR.
Currently On My Stereo: Colonel Claypool's Bucket of Bernie Brains - The Big Eyeball in the Sky
(Link for this specific entry...)
Ha! The goodies from C&L eventually dropped out of this end of the postal system. Too late, alas, for the planned track-laying session, but perhaps next weekend...
The trouble with wanting a couple of custom point configurations for an awkward space is I need matching track, too. Due to a certain anaemia of the exchequer this month, I've tried to do it on the cheap - having loads of bullhead rail left over from my P4 days I thought I'd just buy the track bases and save a few bob. Unfortunately it's mind-numbingly dull work threading the bases onto the rail.
Next time I'll buy normal flex-track instead of being a tight-wad.
Currently On My Stereo: Marillion - Marbles
(Link for this specific entry...)
Not a very productive Sunday. I'm working on an industrial area within the layout, but the space is curved and I can't seem to do anything convincing using standard Peco dog-legs. So I ordered various bits for some DIY trackwork, as much as I hate doing that, but the bl**dy things didn't turn up in time for the weekend bash. Consequently I've spent all day trying various Peco arrangements again, but, unsuprisingly, they don't fit today anymore than they fitted when I tried them in the week. One whole modelling day wasted being stubborn.
The photo is in two parts, by the way, simply because the location doesn't permit a single overall view. The formation isn't what I'm aiming for, either, it's just random attempt #97. This was rapidly followed by find-a-can-of-nice-cool-beer attempt #1, a task which I performed rather more adequately.
This industrial area will support at least one trip working per op session, and involve a 50 foot(ish) mainline run before the driver is in a position to request access to the branch. If I allocate an 08 to the working then it'll take quite some time to get there, yet alone shunt the wagons around, so this should keep an operator busy for a good while.
Currently On My Stereo: Pendragon - Masquerade Overture
(Link for this specific entry...)
A recurring piece of nonsense in the railway modelling egosphere is the concept of the 'Real Modeller' - a whole wallop of neanderthal chest-beating that seems to crop up at least once a week. The format is predictably static, invariably involving the statement that only folk who do X or Y are 'Real Modellers' and the implication that the rest of us are some kind of unspecified deviants. Unsuprisingly, X or Y is always what the individual concerned happens to be interested in, and everything else is marginalised with indecent haste.
A scan of a recent editorial from 'Rail Express Modeller' has been doing the rounds of late, deservedly attracting robust comment as it features a particularly obnoxious if unimaginative example of this bilge. Few will be suprised to find, given the source, that it's those who collect and detail locos who are 'real modellers' and those of us who spent most of our free time building, for example, layouts are presumably a rung or two below kids playing with Thomas sets. Perhaps it's a tad unfair of me to use 'Rail Express Modeller' as a lead-in to this rant, they certainly didn't invent this kind of sneering, but there really is no excuse for this kind of abuse from an individual, yet alone from a magazine.
Our hobby encompasses many areas and disciplines. More often than not, a conversation with a typical modeller will reveal that they're not especially interested in something or other. Operation, benchwork, wagons, wiring, scenics, you name it - somebody out there won't be too keen on it. The fact that we all have our own preferences isn't exactly a ground-breaking revelation. Personally I have little interest in locos, they're just commodity items that pull the wagons around the layout as far as I'm concerned. Nicely detailed, nicely weathered locos are ten-a-penny, whether out-of-the-box or home-made. Yes mate, very nice, stick it over there with the rest. While I certainly wouldn't decry anyone for whom the traction is the be-all and end-all (and I can't deny it's a loco-centric hobby) the fact remains that I realised there's more to railways than train spotting over 30 years ago.
The very name 'Railway Modelling' implies a model of a railway, in other words a layout where the sum is greater than the parts. Conversely, most of the 'Real Modeller' scorn-pouring seems to come from a minority of loco detailers and trackwork enthusiasts, folk who often have either no layout at all or little more than a test-track. I apologise unreservedly to all of the loco modellers who wouldn't dream of putting down the work of others if that rather sweeping generalisation seems to be aimed their way. Honestly, I'm only talking about the inevitable mouthy minority. But it's the mouthy minority you tend to hear.
Which bit of 'Railway' don't these people understand?
Currently On My Stereo: Marillion - Anorak in the UK
(Link for this specific entry...)
There are many, many reasons why I prefer US model railway magazines to our home-grown examples. Amongst these is the refreshingly low incidence of the 'everything revolves around me' mindset that riddles UK publications like a cancer. The US mags seem to have a much more balanced editorial stance, acknowledging and covering the various facets of our broad-church hobby with depth and finesse that's rarely seen over here. The steady background noise of polystyrene being cut, paint being sprayed and, above all, trains being run on layouts normally drowns out the sound of axes being ground.
Long-accustomed to grazing where the grass has a proven track-record of being always greener, I wasn't much impressed to find Model Railroader's reliably excellent 'Model Railroad Planning 2006' marred by the myopic meanderings of a UK contributor this time around. The assertion that "most British layouts are built as a series of discrete, self-contained sections of moderate size" is, frankly, utter nonsense. In fact, the whole paragraph has more than a slight hint of the arrogant 'everything revolves around exhibitions' self-promotion that I utterly detest in the UK press.
Whether this common attitude amongst some members of the exhibition fringe is a result of having their heads so far up their arses that they can see no further than their own tiny world, or whether it stems from an insecurity-driven need to put down anyone with differing interests, is difficult to say. But one thing's for sure - the vast majority of us don't build exhibition layouts and probably never will.
Simple beer-matematics is sufficient to work out that the bulk of the market is the domestic modeller rather then the exhibition niche. The number of exhibition layouts is relatively small, and if you go to shows regularly you'll see the same ones over and over again. Furthermore, many of the regular sightings are 'convenience' affairs, shunting planks or branch line terminii. There's simply no way that this tiny specialist area could support the production volumes needed to make the vast array of RTR models a commercial viability. In fact, once you begin to notice the same individual locos and wagons guesting on multiple layouts, there's no way this sub-market could even sustain a plastic wagon kit. So, where do the vast quantities of Bachmann Mk1s and Hornby HAAs end up? On domestic layouts, obviously, those wrapped around the loft, garage, shed or spare room. This is the overwhelming bulk of the market.
There's been a marked upsurge in this egotistical 'I am the centre of the world' crap pertaining to exhibitions in recent years, and I reckon it's largely down to our old friend the internet. Long-accustomed to the almost exclusive adoration of the exhibition-driven monthlies, some of the prima-donnas haven't taken too kindly to us proles publicising our work-in-progresses online, especially when most of us have ambitions stretching way beyond what will fit in the back of an Astra.
It must be like being put into Douglas Adams' Total Perspective Vortex...
Currently On My Stereo: Marillion - Afraid of Sunlight
(Link for this specific entry...)
A selection of MEA photographs has been added to the prototype section of this site, largely because I've been putting my Bachmann fleet through the coupler shops. The above example looks particularly fine, with the ex-works paint-job positively sparkling in the bright sunlight.
Best move it quick, before some b*gg*r fits solar panels to it...
Currently On My Stereo: Porcupine Tree - Deadwing
(Link for this specific entry...)
Not for the first time, I've been squandering a considerable number of valuable modelling hours on coupler-fitting. The photo shows one of Bachmann's rather nice MFA wagons with a Kadee #18 coupler fitted in the NEM socket being compared against the standard Kadee height gauge. How does Bachmann get it so wrong? Which bit of the word 'standard' does Bachmann not fully comprehend? Normally I rip Bachmann's Un-NEM NEMs straight off and either fit instanters within rakes, or regular Kadees for end-of-rake or 'shuntable' wagons. But it's beginning to suck out my will to live - this is supposed to be plug'n'play!
Here's one where I've shifted the coupler down a little. I haven't got the height quite right, which just goes to show it's not just Bachmann that make mistakes - I should have checked my notes rather than trusting my memory. The difference, of course, is that I've not put the mistake into volume production. I've recognised it and dealt with it - is that so hard?
To get around Bachmann's blunder I normally just laminate some Plastikard under the chassis to provide a lower mounting point for the block that holds the NEM socket. This isn't wildly different to the method most modellers use to fit regular Kadees under UK stock, but retains the NEM socket and the associated ability to swap couplers on a whim.
I've used white Plastikard as it shows up better in the photograph, but would normally use black. An 80 thou thickness is about right, not the 60 thou I mistakenly used on the MFA. The Plastikard glues nicely to the chassis using Butanone, the solvent C&L sells for track building, I've not tried other liquid solvents. I've habitually used superglue to fix the actual mounting block in place, although a recent 'accident' suggests that Butanone might do this job as well.
The separately moulded mount for the the NEM socket found on the MFA makes this faffing around marginally less painful than on other Bachmann stock, such as the 16 ton minerals, where it's an integral part of the chassis. You'd be forgiven for thinking this separately moulded mount would also make it easy for Bachmann to fix the error and save the customer a lifetime of continuing frustration.
The MEA uses the same chassis moulding, and thus exhibits the same problems. Note that the wagon pictured is one of the very recent ones with the retooled, much finer chassis (well worth getting) but Bachmann inexplicably didn't take the opportunity to fix the coupler problem found on the previous 'chunky' chassis variant. As an aside, the very earliest releases had screw-in tension-lock couplers so these comments don't apply.
With 80 thou of Plastikard in place, the coupler height is pretty much spot on. There's a slight amount of coupler droop that's inherent in Bachmann's sloppy-fit sockets - a shim of 10 or 15 thou Plastikard wedged inside the NEM socket above or below the tail of the coupler will normally take care of this. Droop doesn't help reliable coupling.
The trouble is I simply don't have the time to perform surgery on every wagon, in fact I get further and further behind as time goes by. I've always been interested in model railways, systems running multiple trains of many and varied lengths, just as the prototype does. Solutions and techniques have to be scalable to fit this scenario and, though I know I can hack individual wagons to fit whatever couplers I fancy, I also know I can't do this for fleet quantities - I simply don't have the time. It's for this reason that I'm always after a good plug'n'play solution.
I've mentioned Roco close-couplers here before, as I'm rather taken with the things. I've recently decided to roll them out on most of my stock, rather than just selected rakes, as I simply can't see any other option. They may not be as nice looking as instanters and they may not be as slick for uncoupling as the inimitable Kadees, but I can deploy them across fleets in a reasonable time - and that's critical.
On MEAs and MFAs they won't quite give buffer-to-buffer close-coupling, but it's pretty good for out of the box with UK models. Also, lacking any form of proper pivot arm on the wagons, this configuration won't be going around first radius curves in a hurry. But they manage my 30 inch minimum radius, plus every reverse-curve and dog-leg I can find, so I'm more than happy. They don't solve the problem of Bachmann's incorrectly placed sockets, either, so won't uncouple properly if you use uncoupling ramps, but I don't. I'm mainly looking for a quick and easy way to string dozens of wagons together in rakes that are fairly fixed, something at which the Rocos excel.
My latest batch (product reference 40270 for a pack of four or reference 40271 for a bumper box of fifty) came from Mackay Models, but other Roco dealers should be equally able to oblige. At £14.60, the bulk pack will equip 25 wagons for just a tad over 58 pence per wagon, compared to £1.24 for Smiths instanters or £1.70 for Kadee #18s. Not only are they cheap, but as they're simple plug-in jobbies (assuming a suitable socket is present) I've not wasted any time if/when I later swap them for instanters or Kadees.
Highly recommended. A rare win in an area of the hobby where the odds always seem to be stacked against you...
Currently On My Stereo: Eels - Souljacker
(Link for this specific entry...)
<<< Older OMWB entries | Newer OMWB entries >>>