New Railway Modellers Forums

The ramps were solid and not sprung and as mentioned above, there were two and they were placed off-centre in the track - one operated the 'collect' sequence and the other operated the 'drop off' sequence. Mine is the later version. Do the solid ramps not interfere with the couplings then? It looks...

That would work nicely actually. Put the device in line with the DC controller only as they don't play nicely with DCC or live steam. Don't use any DCC fitted locos as the decoders will be confused at best or destroyed at worst.

It's the later one based around the standard 57' underframe. As usual, not particularly accurate but looks the part. I can always run it as a simple coach without the pickup/dropoff function, but it would be nice to at least have the option. I did wonder about having some form of magnetic operation ...

There may be a slight bump but trains should pass at low speed. Otherwise, you can use a file to take some material off the bottom of the Fleischmann rail until it's the same height as the Peco. Solder a peco rail joiner on to the Fleischmann rail, and then they should join smoothly.

I've got an old TPO coach in LMS livery which I've never had working right as the operating ramps are missing the sprung section. I presume these need to be sprung to prevent interfering with the couplings, in the same way as a decoupler ramp is sprung. Any alternatives to the real thing? I wondered...

You need a SPDT switch operated by the point motor or whatever mechanism you use. Use a suitable DC power supply (5v or 12v is usually what's used) to power them up.

The same applies on DCC as well- using track power is a convenient bodge on DCC but not what you should be doing.

Automotive connectors are one option. There are a couple of ranges of crimp terminal connectors in various sizes which are durable, reasonable current rating and no soldering required.

If you've left expansion gaps it shouldn't be a problem, and laying track in hot weather is the safest option. I alway recommend wiring to each piece of track separately, placing no reliance on rail joiners for conductivity. It's a bit more time-consuming for sure, but once it's all laid and wired t...

As always, time to mention that a central table is generally a poor use of space. You need access to both long sides and one end, so it requires a large footprint for the size of layout. A central hole helps, but a layout built on a series of narrower shelves around the wall is usually more efficien...

I like a good Minories :) Mr. Freezer knew what he was doing with the throat design- somehow the angled approach makes it look more complex and imposing than it actually is schematically. One easy addition which can improve the operating potential is to extend the loco spur track into a (probably sh...

It's coming along nicely! The ballast mix looks good and gets away from the usual monotone grey. With the current mix of stock, it looks like there are through trains between the LNER and Sodor! Perhaps Henry has just arrived with a service from Tidmouth, awaiting an engine from the Other Railway to...

Also bear in mind that peco and hornby sleepers are thicker than the real thing. I've always found that this gives an acceptable ballast shoulder without using cork or any other sort of underlay. Maybe for modern high-speed lines with deeper ballast, but otherwise I don't see the need for it.

Looks like a well-stocked shed! Would be interesting to see what's lurking inside. Are trackside passes available?

End2end wrote:I'd be sorely tempted to add a run around loop on the rear track if you have 2 more points.
Thanks
End2end

Although, you could facilitate a runround by uncoupling the loco and running it right around the circuit!

While true of the kits as supplied - they hinge on exactly the principle used on the real thing - significant practice with camming mechanisms in HO means that this problem is now easily overcome. If we ever get RTR articulated coaches, hopefully that will be employed.. I think all that would be re...