ntpntpntp

Peco code 55 is really code 80 with part of the rail hidden. Ah but it isn't, it's more like code 83 in total height - I've been using the stuff in N since the 90s grinning That's why you get a slight step when you join it to Peco N code 80 (and some of their older rail measures as code 78 which makes it worse!) This is well known among N modellers. The batch of Peco TT:120 track I bought recently is exactly the same code 83 (ish). I don't have any Hornby track yet but I do have some old Tillig which comes out at around 81- 82. So Peco joined to Tillig seems quite good with hardly any step. Have to use Tillig joiners though as the foot of the Tillig rail is too wide for Peco joiners. As I say I'm talking about older Tillig track, can't comment on the latest stuff. We are only talking about a few thou difference, you may not notice, but I will certainly be applying wood block and hammer taps to deform the rail joiners and remove the step where necessary. I WON'T be filing the rail as that ruins the top surface.

@dodge No problems with power, it's a 12V DC loco like any other OO, TT, N model. Keep wheels and track clean and it'll run quite happily over dead frog points. Might even have a flywheel (I don't know)? The N gauge version has no flywheel but it still a reliable little beastie :)

@BRIAN it'll get here when it gets here, getting impatient achieves nothing. Besides, just had a rather large winter gas bill here :)

Ah so you need some sort of power distribution board to create more parallel connections from the accessory output of the controller. There are plenty of these available by different firms. They'll work with AC or DC. Here's just one example, I like this design as it provides a set of output terminals to connect up further distribution boards to provide even more terminals: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Evemodel-Distribution-Inputs-Outputs-Voltage/dp/B0814B5P5M/ref=asc_df_B0814B5P5M/ This type of distribution board will make it easier to connect more point motor/switch sets and also lights and other accessories. Note that although point motors only draw power for the brief moment you operate them, things like lights will draw power all the time and if you add too many you may exceed the amount of power the controller can supply. If you run out of power you can always buy another separate cased power supply (eg. from Gaugemaster) to power more accessories, but you'll still need a distribution board to give you more connection terminals.

I doubt magnets will work, the Tillig style have a lifting trip pin so presume a ramp.

So are they in yet, huh, huh?? grinning

I would also suggest a simple hatch or lift up section for access to the track for cleaning and sorting out derailments. My mrs also has a thing about expanded polystyrene and hates the sound of it rubbing together :) Bit of a shame really as it's my main choice of support material for scenery, light and easy to carve. I always use an old but sharp kitchen knife to cut it, that way you don't get the bobbles nor the smell of using a hot wire cutter. Some people use extruded polystyrene (XPS) rather than expanded (EPS). Does Styrofoam or Celotex give you the same problems as the bobbly stuff?

So really you just need to know the specs of the screws, ie. are they metric or BA and what thread size? I can't help, but someone will know and then you can find something suitable on ebay etc. If the screws you buy are too long then just cut shorter :) Can you take the equivalent screw from the other side, and try it in a metric or BA tap & die set to determine what it will fit? That's what I do when I need to identify and source a screw for something. I keep packs of various small size nuts and bolts for general modelling use.

@508006 so when you switch both points to the crossover then you're effectively directly connecting both controller outputs together which can cause power problems. I would always electrically separate trackwork that runs on different controllers, it's just "best practice" and more reliable that way.

I think the problem is there's no room to accommodate the self-centering mechanism (Kinematik Kupplung or KK mechanism) up inside the underframe as is done for coaches and wagons, all you've got is the bufferbeam and front foot plate. Even if you could fit a KK, with a long loco such as the A1 there's a lot of overhang of the front buffer beam on tight curves. So the alternative becomes a bogie mounted coupling, the challenge there will be to mount an NEM pocket at the correct height without fouling the buffers. At the very least you'd have to forego low hanging detail such as 3-link couplings and brake pipes. It can certainly be done: looking at images of Arnold TT locos those which have a front coupling appear to have it bogie mounted? Same with my N gauge steamers, though some of those don't bother with a front coupling pocket either (the more recent models in particular).

The traditional flat board on 2x1 is usual for starting out, though I'd suggest 3x1 to give you that bit more room underneath to accommodate wiring, underfloor point motors, electronic modules etc. Using 3x1 also gives just that bit more rigidity. As you gain experience you find the solid flat top becomes a hindrance to realistic scenery, with hills sprouting out of nowhere, difficulty in having roads and rivers running under the track and just generally everything being too flat on the same level. That's when modellers often move to an open-frame style of baseboard construction.

I have several carry cases of N gauge locos, allowing me to select different sets for exhibition just to ring the changes. This means some will stay stored for a couple of years or more unless I decide to have a "binge" and run each one round a test oval to stir the mechanism. They are stored in their original packaging where possible, and packed so they are upright though some do end up stored on their sides. I don't think it makes a significant difference, just "feel better" to have them upright. I have no worries about movement of lubrication as I've always practised the "less is more" approach. I've seen far too many models drowned in oil when I've serviced them for other people or as incoming second hand acquisitions (they get a full strip down and clean out if necessary).

I've used 9mm ply since the 80s for all my N gauge exhibition layouts, taking an open-frame approach to reduce weight and to allow for scenery contours above and below the track bed. I'll be using the same materials and design for my TT layout. I've found that ply takes pins and screws better than MDF, and also MDF is quite heavy (though not as bad as chipboard!) I tried MDF once about a decade ago for a pair of fiddleyard modules, I won't use it again.

I would always fit IRJs or create an isolating gap between crossovers where the two power circuits meet, as in the bottom of the photo. It just avoids any potential problems. When a loco needs to traverse the crossover you just set both controllers to the same speed and direction and run across. As your trackwork is now fixed, the easiest way is going to be to use a thin razor saw or a slitting disk in a multi-tool and cut a gap down through the track joint between the two points. The slitting disk would be quicker but I prefer to use a razor saw as it's easier to create a neat vertical cut.

Unfortunately they're not inline sockets to fit to a flying lead/cable.

@96RAF fair enough, not having the items to hand I don't know the specs. No doubt 6.3mm inline sockets are also available. There are certainly 6.3 > 5.5 adapters but by the time you've messed around findng and buying might as well just get the proper cable when it becomes available :) I'd probably just cut both ends and use a choc-block but that's not the proper thing to do ;)

Is there anything special about the HM7020 adapter cable for the DCC system? Isn't it just a socket for the output of the PSU and a track connector plug? It's only £7.95, just add one to the pre-order. Alternatively just cut the track power lead of the DC set and fit a suitable inline socket. There are loads of such sockets on ebay, AliExpress etc. which come complete with screw terminals to connect the wires. My son bought a bag full of plugs and sockets a little while ago (they fit his guitar effect pedals etc.), and I actually have a pair with quick connect push down terminals for testing stuff. From this listing you'd want the DC 5.5*2.1 female type A https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/275282228411 https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/txoAAOSwystiYLY~/s-l1600.jpg

Use cork strip to raise the track as part of creating a ballast shoulder (which I prefer) but don't expect it to have any appreciable sound dampening effect once you've either pinned through it or glued and ballasted the track. I do find using cork gives a better surface for gluing track (I don't pin it, the pins are unsightly). I can sand the track bed before gluing if necessary to make any levelling adjustments. Remember you'll also need to raise platforms and other height-specific lineside features by the same amount. I use 2-3mm thick cork in N (depends if it's mainline track or sidings) , I'll probably use the same for TT. I buy sheets of cork from whatever is the cheapest source at the time and cut the strips myself. 1" wide for N, so maybe 1.5" for TT? Oh and definitely DON'T simply cover the entire baseboard in cork - now that is a total waste of time, material and expense!

Comparing the MOROP pdfs for the coupling pockets NEM 355 (N) and NEM 358 (TT), the drawings look identical and indeed the text itself says "Die Kupplungsaufnahme ist identisch mit derjenigen für die Nenngröße N nach NEM 355. " ie. the pocket design is identical. Comparing the MOROP pdfs for coupling heads NEM 357 (N) and NEM 359 (TT) the obvious difference is in the rear coupling shaft. The N coupling head has to lift so it will interact with the tongue at the top of the pocket, and the rear of the shaft has a sloping cutaway underneath. The TT coupling NEM 359 lacks both the top recess for the tongue and also the rear undercut, as it is not intended to lift. So.. N couplings should fit the TT pocket and v.v. Dapol easy-shunts aren't supposed to lift like Rapidos do, so I guess their shaft will be more to NEM 359 design (as would Fleischmann Profi couplings?) @Rallymatt I am surprised you found the Easy-shunts "flap about". You mean vertically up and down? The NEM spec for the height of the pocket is also identical for N and TT so again surprised you say the Easy-shunt trip pins foul the track. https://www.morop.org/downloads/nem/de/nem355_d.pdf https://www.morop.org/downloads/nem/de/nem358_d.pdf https://www.morop.org/downloads/nem/de/nem357_d.pdf https://www.morop.org/downloads/nem/de/nem359_d.pdf

When ballasting points I always start spreading the ballast from the point, working away from the tiebar. I use soft makeup brushes to spread. Don't forget the most useful tool of all: a teaspoon! Use it as a shovel for the ballast but also, after spreading the ballast into place with the brush, tap the top of the rails gently with the back of the teaspoon - this will clear the sleeper tops of any stray grains :) I was taught this tip back in the 70s at my model railway club. I must admit I've never found the need to add anything to the dilute PVA to break the surface tension, I just go with diluting to around 60/40 water/PVA and use a pipette to run the clue into the ballast from the outside edge and down the side of the rails - never drop it on from a height :) Don't drown the ballast, you only need to apply enough glue for it to soak fully in. Some people seem to hate ballasting but I love it and find it very relaxing.

I was just going to say the same as @Rallymatt, those small single track engine sheds were only ever for little branch line locos not express locos :)

@david_watts1 Push-pull sets with a loco at one end and a driving trailer (Steuerwagen) are quite common in Europe, not just short branch-line trains but long InterCity services too :) I run many different types on my German N gauge layout. Nowadays the driving trailer model will often have a DCC decoder socket to support the directional lighting. On DC without a decoder you end up with both white and rear lights permanently on if placed on a DCC layout. With a decoder fitted that will handle directional lights on DC and of course on DCC as well. In fact I've just removed a very "iffy" decoder installation someone had installed in an N gauge Austrian Steuerwagen, they'd done something really odd with a stay-alive circuit bypassing the decoder and causing only the red lights to work regardless of direction. It's now restored to normal and with a DC blanking plate in the socket as I rarely run DCC in N. Works perfectly :) Some photos of that type of DR Doppelstock sets and loco here: Google will find you plenty of other photos if you can't get to that twitter :) Search "DR dosto"

If there is any noticeable difference in rail height, I would advise NOT filing the rail top but rather tap with a hammer and wooden block to deform the rail joiner slightly.

I agree with regard to Arnold TT:120 products. Actually I'd also love an Arnold N:160 club with a discount scheme as I run many items of the N gauge range :)

Another vote for PVA from me :) I've glued N gauge flexi track and points for decades, to thin cork strip as a bed. I think pins are unsightly on scenic trackwork.