ntpntpntp

I've reported it to the National Cyber Security Centre 🙂

Highly suspicious in my opinion. If you look at the "About" page it talks about fashion, it mentions opening ours as "PT" (Pacific Time ?), the postcode on the contact page isn't a valid format and Albion Way in Norwich is a totally different postcode block. The Terms and Conditions page mentions Italian law! I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.

XML is a tagged markup language. It is a human-readable structured / nested representation of data, but if you open it with something like your internet browser that should give you at least some options to expand or collapse the structure and home in on the items you're particularly interested in checking. Ignore any "this XML has no style" messages, you can still view the data 🙂

What DCC system do you have? Can it drive locos using 4 digit long addresses? What are the current values of CV17, CV18 and CV29? If you can read these then use the online tools below to check the current decoder settings. This page has a tool which can encode or decode CV 29 Enter the value you have for CV 29 and use the "back calc" button to see which flags are set. The same page also has a tool can also encode or decode CV 17 & 18. DCC CV29 Calculator (2mm.org.uk)

... and you can read it back as address 3? You also checked the CV29 bit #5 is set to short address mode too?

I've used those old style solder tag strips for decades 🙂

Did the previous owner reset the address for you? (I have another post awaiting approval for some reason)

If you can read the CVs ok that implies the decoder is alive and the output FETs are not blown. Simple question but have you read the existing address (& check if it is long or short address)? Have you tried resetting the decoder (should return to short address 3)? To test the mechanicals I agree with replacing the decoder with a DC blanking plate and run on DC.

Looks like the Tillig slip is about £43 from Rails, about 3x the price of a Hornby TT:120 point but course it is a more complex bit of track. The going rate for slips in N and 00 is around £50 or so. I might get one just to play with and see how well it does match the Hornby trackwork, although really I want to go down the Peco code 55 route for a layout when I do get round to building one (N gauge projects to complete first 🙂 )

If only that diamond crossing could be a single slip and give access to the sidings from both ovals 🙂 A double slip would be even better and remove the need for the crossover right next to it. Tillig offer a double slip which appears to match the length and geometry of the Hornby diamond crossing. 83300 - Tillig Modellbahnen

I'm afraid I really don't see the point in all this speculation. What does it achieve other than to set up for "I told you so" or "not what I wanted" reactions? Let's just wait and see, eh? 🙂

I mentioned using a distribution board: These are great when you start to need multiple feeds to your track (eg. for each oval or to keep sidings alive for DCC). There are dozens of designs available, here's just one example. It does have a DC socket (though as I say the P9300 plug may not fit 😞 ), but it also has screw terminals for the input pair as well as the outputs. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/183735388459

You certainly can simply cut off the plug from the end of the P9300 lead if you wish, I suspect most folk end up doing something like that once they get into soldering track feeds and using distribution boards to power multiple feeds. An alternative "non-destructive" approach would be to look for a female inline socket which matches the plug (I think somewhere on the forum the specifications for the plug dimensions are given?) Unfortunately I think the plug used doesn't match other commonly used DC socket sizes which is a shame as there are several cheap distribution boards which have a DC socket input. This would also work: take an R7324 adapter lead which fits the P9300 and either cut the two pin plug off or simply use a small size "choc block" to connect the wiring. Totally non-destructive 🙂 I recently bought the R7337 power supply and that came with the adapter lead.

Position the text cursor where you want the image to be inserted, hover over the thumbnail image of the photo you've attached and it'll give you an "insert" link to click.

There's not going to be any central resource with lots of aerial views, it's down to the layout owners to take such photos if they can and make them available on their web pages, blog or whatever. There are sites which focus on track plans but that's not the same thing (and tbh some of the plans I've seen on a recent facebook page haven't been very good) I kind-of have an aerial view of my N gauge layout but that was taken by someone on a step ladder in 1996 and the three image that I stitched together are missing a couple of bits 😞

Hornby had a marketing tie-up with Minitrix in the 1970s to market the latter's small range British N models, hence the "Hornby Minitrix" product line. Good solid models of their time though some where a bit compromised to fit the German loco chassis used. Still popular and reliable models 40-50 years on though some spares are becoming difficult to obtain now. There have been the "Lyddle End" resin buildings and of course the Arnold Brighton Belle. The main problem is probably most of the major loco classes and wagons/coaches have already been made by Farish or Dapol (with some duplication) plus you have the new entrants into the British N market such as Revolution and Sonic filling gaps. I would think there's little market share left for another major player producing even more duplication. It's a small market as it is.

As Bee says, choice of track really has no bearing on use with DCC, other than Peco offer some of their pointwork as "Unifrog" design which is supposedly "DCC friendly" in terms of the way the blades are bonded to the running rails, and both routes through the point are permanently live. The frog is metal but isolated, requires powering via a changeover switch linked to the tiebar or by using a "frog juicer" device. I've used Peco N track for decades, with almost exclusively Electrofrog pointwork since the 80s. A live frog is always better for slow running of short wheelbase locos. Personally I'd steer clear of second hand track and points especially, so much of it is ex-layout and damaged or contaminated. I'd only ever consider as-new unused (ie. bought too much)

At 1:87 scale the HO items will look obviously too large in a 1:120 environment. Underscale (such as British N at 1:148) works better as you can place them in the background as a "forced perspective"

You'll ruin Xuron cutters, they're not designed for hardened steel. I do have some old heavy duty cutters but as mentioned before I prefer the cutting disc method, which both cuts and allow me to de-burr and round off the end of the rod. Really should make the baseboards removable or on hinges so you can access underneath 🙂 I've been been building my layouts as modular / portable baseboards since the 70s, there's no way I'd ever want to be lying underneath to work on them.

I use a cutting disk in a minidrill. Must wear eye protection! Also, mark the rod and remove the point motor before cutting - don't try to do it in situ or the heat will melt the plastic of the tiebar.

In what way? The rail code of both system is 100. I'm not sure if the width of the foot is compatible with Hornby to fit rail joiners? (In N gauge the Fleischmann rail has a wider foot than Peco for example) Geometry is probably different (would need to check the catalogues) so curve radii and point angles etc. may not mix-and-match. Back-to-back standards - I expect Fleischmann will follow NEM standards but no idea about Hornby. General look - well Fleischmann is pre-ballasted track so looks quite different to Hornby. I believe Fleischmann took over Roco's HO un-ballasted track system when the two brands merged (that's what happened with the N gauge track systems) so you may have a choice of ballasted or un-ballasted. Bottom line is I wouldn't go trying to mix brands of track on a layout. As to whether Hornby models will run on Fleichmann track, I have no experience. I have run Fleischmann stock on Hornby, Peco and Kato track without problems.

Not having investigated the dongle - is that capable of driving the legacy decoder(s) via the consist address?

Could be condensation on the track if the temperature is varying significantly. I have DCC G scale locos and stock, I used to notice the running would become stuttery in the late summer evenings as the rails cooled. It's always recommended that electronics (decoders, DCC systems) should be stored in reasonably stable conditions.

Shouldn't be a problem. Code 100 rail is tall and will accommodate older deeper flanges. I guess the only possible problem could be the back-to-back measurement through Fleischmann turnouts, but their track system has been around for decades and will have been designed for old Fleischmann models.

Not got that far yet with a TT project, but when I do I'll use the same as I've used for decades for N gauge: Woodland Scenics fine light grey or maybe fine buff.