BASINGSTOKE 1958-67 (87ft x 25ft)

[The Duke 71000]

A very informative post. I recall that Basingstoke Station entrance - your picture shows it in 1918, had not changed by the time I started commuting in 1972. At that time you could still get a "silver service" breakfast in the mornings - I cannot now remember when that "service" finished, but the buffet car did very good toasted bacon sandwiches or a fried eggs on toast - they went down very well at 7.30am (ish) with a coffee. I was actually in the buffet car on the Bournemouth train involved in the Clapham Junction crash in 1988. The buffet service was closed on that day, but as no seats available, my travelling companions and I just stood in the buffet counter area - not the best of experiences!

 

Bulleidboy,

The Clapham crash a nasty incident. That then got a lot worse. Thanks to Government removing HMRI and putting a legal Eagle (QC Hidden) in charge. Which prevented the crash being properly investigated. As a result no new rule was put in the rule book to prevent such a re-occurrence !

 

The Duke 71000  

 

 

 

        

 

 

 

 

 

      

[The Duke 71000]

BASINGSTOKE 1958-67 - LOCOMOTIVE FLEET - Southern steam types part 3

 

For those modellers that haven't already noticed, the Southern Region of BR inherited a locomotive numbering scheme that revelled the locomotives original heritage !

 

 

British Railways added 30000 to Southern loco numbers, which incorporated the Southern Railways scheme of 1923 as follows:

 

30000-30999 ex London & South Western Railway (L&SWR) designs.

31000-31999 ex South Eastern & Chatham Railway (SE&CR) designs 

32000-32999 ex London Brighton & South Coast Railway (LB&SCR) designs.

33000-36999 Southern Railway (basically Bulleid) designs.

 

 

So many of my models in the first two groups have already been dealt with in "Part 1" & "Part 2" of this Southern Layout Fleet series - check previous posts for all the pictures.... 

 

In the next installment of "Layout Locomotive Fleet" I shall deal with non Southern & BR designs.

 

[atom3624]

Always like the Bulleid pacifics.

 

The 'Spam Cans' always looked special / different, but the general balance of styling just looks 'right' on the rebuilt ones, particularly the MN's.

 

Al.

[The Duke 71000]

Always like the Bulleid pacifics.

 

The 'Spam Cans' always looked special / different, but the general balance of styling just looks 'right' on the rebuilt ones, particularly the MN's.

 

Al.

 

Al.

I totally agree with you.

 

Being big even in model form they look impressive whisking 12 car trains around the layout.

 

The Duke 71000

[Bulleidboy]

I love the re-built Merchant Navy Class locomotives - I currently have twenty four - I was a collector before I built a layout. Having said that, only two feature on my layout - Channel Packet 35001 and Rotterdam Lloyd 35015. I have replaced tenders where necessary. When renumbering and renaming, I try to use a loco with the correct shed code (on the smokebox door) as produced by Hornby - it's one small item that then does not have to be changed. One problem with that policy is that Hornby have never produced a M/N with shed code 72B (Salisbury).

My layout's era is c.1961 and 35004 Cunard White Star, 35006 Peninsular & Oriental and 35007 Aberdeen Commonwealth were all shedded at Salisbury at that time.

One other "small" problem is that "mint" used rebuilt M/N's are now getting expensive! BB

[The Duke 71000]

BASINGSTOKE 1958-67 - Sir HERVIS IN THE "CHOP SHOP"

I have already mentioned in previous posts that most of my locomotive fleet get modified in various ways. What may not be understood are the reasons why. There are in fact three reasons.

 

 

[The Duke 71000]

I love the re-built Merchant Navy Class locomotives - I currently have twenty four - I was a collector before I built a layout. Having said that, only two feature on my layout - Channel Packet 35001 and Rotterdam Lloyd 35015. I have replaced tenders where necessary. When renumbering and renaming, I try to use a loco with the correct shed code (on the smokebox door) as produced by Hornby - it's one small item that then does not have to be changed. One problem with that policy is that Hornby have never produced a M/N with shed code 72B (Salisbury).

My layout's era is c.1961 and 35004 Cunard White Star, 35006 Peninsular & Oriental and 35007 Aberdeen Commonwealth were all shedded at Salisbury at that time.

One other "small" problem is that "mint" used rebuilt M/N's are now getting expensive! BB

 

Bulleidboy, 

Indeed the rebuilt Bulleid MN's make nice models. However the latest MN's in original form have a chassis as seen below. Now that's what I call beautiful......

 

 

[atom3624]

I've been thinking about the application of the flywheel, and not having it.

 

Older 'recent' Hornby locomotives have the 5-pole skew wound motor made famous by Sam's finding of the same motor for less than £3.

That aside, they're superb performing, torquey motors.

 

I find that the flywheel stops the motor performing 'properly'.

It's great for starting smoothly provided you're going to accelerate fairly soon.

 

If you were to 'need to negotiate points' thus remain slow / crawl, they cannot do this as well.

I've seen this with the diesel behemoths as well.

 

My older Princess Elizabeth, Royal Scot and others, are superb at crawling for prolonged periods, then can accelerate effortlessly.

 

I don't see the point in needing the flywheel to decelerate - that's what the controller's for as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry, but this one I'll need to be convinced myself ... perhaps with the Hush Hush if/as/when I receive it.

 

Al.

[The Duke 71000]

Older 'recent' Hornby locomotives have the 5-pole skew wound motor made famous by Sam's finding of the same motor for less than £3.

Al.

Al,

 

 

 

 

[37lover]

The Duke 71000,

Interesting comments from yourself.

But I always believed the £135 [you say £150] Duty threshold was per order, or consignment, not an annual allowance. Even so if you are below the "annual" threshold then the VAT and Duty are not applied and the above motor would cost £9.85. Perhaps it is different for personal rather than business?

[The Duke 71000]

The Duke 71000,

Interesting comments from yourself.

But I always believed the £135 [you say £150] Duty threshold was per order, or consignment, not an annual allowance. Even so if you are below the "annual" threshold then the VAT and Duty are not applied and the above motor would cost £9.85. Perhaps it is different for personal rather than business?

 

37lover.

I think you may be confusing your persoanl allowance when returning from a holiday(s). i.e at an airport or port. With the system applied to imported goods via the postal system. i.e you personally have not left or re-entered the country. They are not the same ! 

 

 

 

 

[atom3624]

Here's a link to a few I purchased earlier this year - bought 3, 1 not quite there, the other 2 just like Hornby's - slow, continuous up to maximum speed - £7 got me what costs at least £12 for 2.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-12V-24V-22200RPM-High-Speed-Dual-Shaft-5-Pole-Rotor-Motor-DIY-Toy-Car-Boat/253839581967?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649

 

OK, it's 'dual drive' which permits the flywheel option, and one wasn't up to it - the other 2 are.

 

Straight from GOV.CO.UK:

You pay VAT on goods sent from non-European Union (EU) countries and EU special territories (eg the Canary Islands) if they’re:

• gifts worth more than £39
• other goods worth more than £15

 

Also:

Type and value of goodsCustoms DutyAnything under £135No chargeGifts worth £135-£6302.5%, but rates are lower for some goods - call the helplineGifts above £630 and other goods above £135The rate depends on the type of goods and where they came from - call the helpline

 

I don't think Sam was buying a job lot.

If he did, then correct declarations are required, as you state.

 

Let's face it, without asking for motors to be sent as a 'Gift', you can purchase at least 5 motors, and at least 3 will be good - that's part of the extra you pay for, QC I've no doubt, but not 300%.

 

For me, as Sam, I was curious.

They do not include worms, this is true.

 

Back on the original track, I am very glad you like your new-look MN's, and am curious drive is to the front axle.

I maintain that I require to be convinced of new-style motor applications, with flywheel.

I believe you should never turn immediately to zero - state the obvious.

I believe maintaining continuity over points should not be necessary - with pickups on drivers and tender.

 

Link to a couple of silly slo' mo' videos of mine - showing how slow / smooth DoS and RS are:

 

 

 

Al.

[The Duke 71000]

 

 

 

Straight from GOV.CO.UK:

You pay VAT on goods sent from non-European Union (EU) countries and EU special territories (eg the Canary Islands) if they’re:

• gifts worth more than £39
• other goods worth more than £15

 

Also:

Type and value of goodsCustoms Duty Anything under £135 No charge Gifts worth £135-£630 2.5%, but rates are lower for some goods - call the helpline Gifts above £630 and other goods above £135 The rate depends on the type of goods and where they came from - call the helpline 

 

Al; 

 

 

[atom3624]

Hi Duke,

 

Science is my background and has been my life, so I'm fully aware of the effects of 3-, 5-pole motors.

 

Regret, but most Hornby motors are skew wound.

 

Understood, flywheels can help in displays or where power is applied / removed abruptly - I would have thought some form of capacitive application, or simply better-supervised application should be considered in view of costs.

 

I maintain my observation that even the skew-wound 5-pole motors WITH flywheels have problems starting and maintaining a crawl - only the Hattons 66 can of the mix of perhaps 100 locomotives I have.

 

Those 'fun' videos of mine I believe prove the worth of the 5-pole skew-wound armatures in the older 'Super Detail' Hornby locomotives - overlapping poles permitting sustained slow operation.

Obviously to permit operation, they cannot skew too much or the motor would stall. It is at this point, between the overlapped poles where the motor is at its weakest, and I believe where the flywheel (37g for 2x brass flywheels on a failed skew-wound 5-pole off my Class 68!!) limit / stop the motor from being able to really crawl - like what is observed with DoS and RS in my very crude videos.

 

Coreless motors are what we've normally called 'brushless' - windings static on the outside, rotating magnet. When in my R/Control years I found them hugely more powerful for their size than 'normal' and higher performance (fewer windings of larger X-section wire) motors - but highly preferable for their near lack of maintenance requirement - only occasionally to replace (real) bearings.

The main observation we had of these motors apart from the extra power, is that they lack torque low down, so you will find for the likes of 'crawlers', which require low-down torque, despite being higher maintenance, the R/C Community prefer to keep the brushed motors for this torque - this is what is required for sustained slow speed operation in railways - and a reasonable 'rev range'.

 

None skew wound?

Open up a few, you may be surprised!

That Dapol 68 motor was obvious as it had side venting to assist in dissipating heat - definitely not straight poles.

 

Look, as I repeated in my last post, I'm sure your new MN is superb, and runs well.

I agreed that powering the front axle instead of the middle, directly linked to the piston, etc., was curious, but I don't think for general supervised operation that the flywheel is necessary - I would find it an obstruction.

 

Al.

[GWR 14xx Tank]

I am not wishing to start an arguament over Sam's Trains and his motor findings, but I would like to strongly disagree and voice my opinions on several of your points mentioned. I am going to keep this debate civil, as suggested in the Forum Guidelines, so hopefully the moderators are ok with this. This is also going to be quite a lengthy post.

 

Fair enough, if he went over his £150 limit a year, he should inform customs - which I am sure Sam would do, being the sensible and clever person that he is. I do doubt a lot that he would need £150 worth of goods coming from overseas - his layout is finished, maybe a few motor replacements here and there, but needing 50 motors in 1 year is a bit excessivce.

 

First of all, I do not think that Sam was suggesting Hornby sell their motors for £3 - again, being the sensible person that he is, he most likely knows that they have to make a profit and sort all the taxes out properly, so this would not be possible. The video was merely a comparison between Hornby's £27 motor and the one he found for £3. He was most probably suggesting that Hornby lower their prices slightly to match the other competition for motors that can be found online - I would not pay £27 for a motor. But, if Hornby lowered their prices to £14 - £15 pounds, then I would be more comfortable buying it as I know it is from a reputable company, and the taxes on the motor from China would add to this anyway.

 

Even if Sam did commit some crime (be it a petty one or a serious one) I am sure he would never commit tax fraud intentionally, and if he did realise he commited the crime, he would do his best to rectify the issue with Customs.

 

"Sam's little You Tube page" is not what it is cracked up to be.

Could you explain further what this means? I find that Sam's channel is a place of inspiration for those who enjoy dabbling in the world of model railways, and for those who are thinking of joining said world. His experiments are genuinely useful and provide some interesting and surprising results, which actually changed my opinion on some topics after seeing the shocking results! His reviews are also well put together, and reveal some of the mistakes and issues in manufacturing that annoy people that buy the products. He is one of the biggest model railway channels on YouTube, with 83,200 + subscribers - guessing by your previous posts, you are not one of them. It is not the subscriber or view count that matters, it is the quality of information and topics discussed within the video. I would much rather watch someone with 500 subscribers and producing good "How-To" videos, than someone with 10 million who melts lipsticks for content.

 

 

On Sam's programme he stupidly revealed searching ebay on his computer.

 And? I think 90% of us on the forum would search eBay for a more cheaper suitable replacement before paying £27 pounds! Unless I have gone completely dotty, saving money is NOT stupid.

 

 

At the end of the day the motors looked similar but were NOT identical to the ones Hornby use.

Sam was not trying to find absolutely identical ones to Hornby's motors - just one that worked in the application he needed, for a cheaper price, to compare it to Hornby's £27 motor. Even if the motor was identical, then he would never know if it was the actual Hornby motor - because he doesn't know where / what supplier Hornby get their motors from!

 

I strongly disagree with the majority of negative points you made towards Sam's Trains, and think it was more than reasonable to carry out his experiment.

 

14xx Tank

 

 

 

[atom3624]

Sam for President - I like Sam as well!!

 

This is somebody else's thread, we're all entitled to our opinions, provided it's sensible of course and within forum limitations.

 

Duke, let's see more track, locos, trains .... scenery - where are you up to?

Love the size of the layout - I'd love to have that room, and a decent budget would help of course, to do something like you're developing ...

 

Keep the updates coming.

 

Al.

[GWR 14xx Tank]

Yes, I agree with you there Atom, Duke's layout is brilliant - I only have a 3mx3m space in the loft, nowhere else to put it! Love the modifications and in-depth detail that he puts into his posts, it is always nice to read them and see what he has been up to.  

 

Sorry to The Duke 71000 if I have jumped in on his thread to express my opinions.

 

14xx Tank

[The Duke 71000]

Hi Duke,

Regret, but most Hornby motors are skew wound.

Understood, flywheels can help in displays or where power is applied / removed abruptly - I would have thought some form of capacitive application, or simply better-supervised application should be considered in view of costs.

I maintain my observation that even the skew-wound 5-pole motors WITH flywheels have problems starting and maintaining a crawl - only the Hattons 66 can of the mix of perhaps 100 locomotives I have.

Those 'fun' videos of mine I believe prove the worth of the 5-pole skew-wound armatures in the older 'Super Detail' Hornby locomotives - overlapping poles permitting sustained slow operation.

Obviously to permit operation, they cannot skew too much or the motor would stall. It is at this point, between the overlapped poles where the motor is at its weakest, and I believe where the flywheel (37g for 2x brass flywheels on a failed skew-wound 5-pole off my Class 68!!) limit / stop the motor from being able to really crawl - like what is observed with DoS and RS in my very crude videos.

Coreless motors are what we've normally called 'brushless' - windings static on the outside, rotating magnet. When in my R/Control years I found them hugely more powerful for their size than 'normal' and higher performance (fewer windings of larger X-section wire) motors - but highly preferable for their near lack of maintenance requirement - only occasionally to replace (real) bearings.

None skew wound? Open up a few, you may be surprised!

That Dapol 68 motor was obvious as it had side venting to assist in dissipating heat - definitely not straight poles.

Look, as I repeated in my last post, I'm sure your new MN is superb, and runs well.

I agreed that powering the front axle instead of the middle, directly linked to the piston, etc., was curious, but I don't think for general supervised operation that the flywheel is necessary - I would find it an obstruction.

Al.

Al,

 

 

 

As I mentioned I haven't taken many of Hornby's motors to pieces. But I haven't so far found any that were skew wound. By the way the "skew" in a motor is physically fixed. It cannot increase or decrease, as it is set by the shape of the skewed metal armature mountings, around which the copper windings are wound. But if you have found skew wound ones, that's good. Saves me the trouble looking.

 

 

[atom3624]

This is the monster used in Dapol's 68: https://www.dccsupplies.com/item-p-112656/class-68-bogie-motor-dapol-oo-gauge.htm

This is obviously 'skew wound'.  The open sides permit viewing.

 

A few minutes' Googling didn't permit me to locate anybody ripping apart a Hornby 5-pole.

If you use this link - to the Ebay cheapo - they indicate photos of the armature, obviously, again skew wound.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-12V-24V-22200RPM-High-Speed-Dual-Shaft-5-Pole-Rotor-Motor-DIY-Toy-Car-Boat/253839581967?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649

 

Interestingly it 'is known' that Heljan still use straight pole non-skew-wound armatures, but cleaned, 'dabbed with oil', they are excellent performers.

 

YES, 100% agree, much relates to the controller, but of that observed with my poor unfortunate HM2000, it may exaggerate effects, through inconsistent supply.

The simple point I was making was the inertia to overcome between poles, increased by sticking big lumps of brass on the shaft.

 

Above a 2-3 mph 'slow walk' equivalent of my Dos and RS videos - watch the spokes, despite my caffeine-induced unstable camera holding, they are moving - reaching perhaps 10-15mph scale equivalent, the flywheel should smooth things very nicely, whilst still slow, removing that 'jerk between poles' sometimes observed.

 

I'm an Industrial Chemist by profession.

Basically I've been so impressed with the older Hornby Super Detail locomotives, with their 5-pole skew wound motors, I didn't see the point of the flywheel.

 

Some will of course benefit, but I didn't see the need on the 'big kettles'.

It occupies space you could be filling with Pb anyway!

 

Al.

[96RAF]

Just ordered 5 of those alternative black can motors, due delivery from China in 3-5 weeks. £15 the lot. I need a replacement motor for one of my ESU decoder test rigs, the rest will be used as spares for any loco they fit.

 

As regards Sam’s Trains and similar ‘tube’ video channels I have little time for any of them for many reasons, e.g. as The Duke says - penny a click. In the main the majority are ill prepared, scriptless and poorly presented. Some are so abysmal they should be moderated out of existence, but in this crazy PC world no one is entitled to overly criticise in case it offends some sensitive soul.

 

I have lost count of the number of videos I have bailed out of due to watching the back of someone's hand rather than the subject under review. It is not rocket science to shine the camera on the subject. It is not rocket science to prepare a script and talk it through the video. Finally it is not rocket science to know what you are talking about in the first place - i.e. Rule 1 of public speaking.

 

Rant over and apologies to Duke for needless trespass on his much more interesting topic.

[The Duke 71000]

Just ordered 5 of those alternative black can motors, due delivery from China in 3-5 weeks. £15 the lot. I need a replacement motor for one of my ESU decoder test rigs, the rest will be used as spares for any loco they fit.

RAF96,

And this helps Hornby ?

Sams a smart lad, I think in 20 years from now he will be the next Nick Leeson !  😉

The Duke 71000

[96RAF]

Just ordered 5 of those alternative black can motors...

And this helps Hornby ? 

The Duke 71000

 

I have no interest in helping Hornby sort out its ridiculous motor policy.

I tried to compile a database rationalising all Hornby locos and their motors some time ago, with a view to ending up with a common standard of say 6 basic motors, cheap can, slim can, chunky can, some with one or two shaft gears and/or flywheels.. It got to the stage where by visual reference I could assume that PN A was maybe, probably the same item as PN Z, etc, et seq, but in the end I gave up having undergone the madness of analysing Hornby allocating PNs seemingly at random from a sequential listing regardless of if that physical item had been in previous use since year dot. In the end failure was due to lack of any definitive reference material apart from visual from a service sheet.

I realise that parts do go obsolete but Hornby seems to make a sport of reallocating PNs that are well used with the same part under a new number. Even to the point of Thomas and friends locos having separate PNs from their identical donor loco parts.

[atom3624]

Great fun isn't it? !!

I think 50% of the Hornby steam locos - Royals, Scots, A1/3/4, Duchesses, MN's (OK previous) use the same ...

I don't think we can say 'bring back the X-04' but life would be a lot simpler!!

 

Al.

[Pirlouit95]

 

Maintenant la famille Bulleid.

/media/tinymce_upload/56d3fe4586a7bf91b67dff9e33a12e0b.jpg

 Ci-dessus: à commencer par l'un des "vilains canetons" des Bulleids, en fait surnommé "Charlies". Est-ce le modèle Hornby d'un Q1 Class 0-6-0, BR puissance 5FA. Ces locomotives étaient le type 0-6-0 le plus puissant d'Europe. En fait, ils étaient si puissants que leur 10 tonnes de 49 tonnes était un peu léger lorsqu'ils tentaient d'arrêter de gros trains de marchandises non équipés. En effet, ils avaient la mauvaise habitude de simplement glisser le long des rails, lorsqu'ils essayaient d'arrêter un train de marchandises. Le modèle devrait être puissant, mais il ne pesait que 223 g. Comme mentionné dans la légende précédente, les modèles de locomotives tendres semblent avoir beaucoup d'espace à l'intérieur, y compris celui-ci. Un petit coup de plomb supplémentaire a donc été ajouté en interne pour le porter à 306 g. En conséquence, il transporte maintenant de gros trains sur les collines, et comme son homologue de la vie réelle, glisse vers le bas en essayant de s'arrêter  😆!!! 

The Duke 71000      

The first Hornby locomotive I bought due to a merchant error, but kept a Q1.

Did the marking exist or is it totally fanciful?

 

I have laboriously finished (not easy the Google translation) reading your articles.

Another big thank you for all your explanations.

I find it unfortunate that the discussion on SAM, although legitimate, came to pollute the whole. It would have been better to create a separate topic.

[The Duke 71000]

BASINGSTOKE 1958-67 - LAYOUT LOCOMOTIVE FLEET - LMR types.

 

 As Basingstoke was connected to the rest of the BR Regions, via the inter-regional line to Reading. Thence to Oxford & Banbury where there was an LMR/ER connection. ex LMS designs did appear at Basingstoke, particularly after 1965, when the Western Region abolished steam. LMS types particularly Black 5's began working through from Banbury all the way to destinations such as Bournemouth & Poole. So a small number of these ex LMS types are needed in the layouts fleet to deal with these inter-regional trains.