D9020 Nimbus

Of course, Heljan would have had the benefit of the research for their O gauge model (as Hornby had for their OO model). It seemed to be a pretty serious proposal, since they had the proposed identities and liveries, although the 08 and J94 were just vague proposals. I doubt if it was any further advanced than the Hornby one, and the length of time models take to come to market can vary considerably — I think the Dapol N gauge Bulleid "Light Pacific" holds the current record — announced in 2012 and still not available.

On DCC systems you can control the acceleration rate by altering the values of certain CVs (configuration variables). Is this not possible with HM7000?

There are I believe a very small number of TT gauge US items available, made by a Czech company I believe — a small layout to this scale featured in Continental Modeller a while back. Berliner-Bahnen made a sizeable attempt to enter the US market soon after German unification. This led to their bankruptcy and being taken over by Tillig. I've never seen a TT layout featured in Model Railroader in recent times—but it has shrunk considerably over the last 10-15 years and now has about 72 pages in a typical month, and only one layout feature per issue.

Just like Blu-Ray did… (On occasion the better technical standard does win out, in this case over HD-DVD.)

The website and catalogue are misleading; the uncoupling ramp must be fitted to a Hornby 166mm straight — it is not a track in itself.

Have you tested any other locos on this track? You might have a wiring fault as well as a faulty loco.

And bear in mind that the loco won't move off until the controller has been turned up quite a bit. The sound will also stop and restart if you change direction.

Err… D2315 wouldn't be an 08, it was an 04. Perhaps you mean D3315?

Tillig sell straight tracks exactly the same length as Hornby in their "Modellgleis" range. If you can’t obtain it more locally, Modellbahnshop Lippe can normally supply it. It will almost certainly be more expensive, however.

It's worth noting that some of the European manufacturers you mention — Piko for example — also use close coupling mechanisms and, indeed, have adopted the same type of coupling for their latest models. Unfortunately, there seems to be a wide variation in the interpretation of NEM standards; sagging NEM mounts are quite common on many OO and some HO models.

Quality control issues are not unique to TT:120 or to Hornby. Some firms have blamed the inability until recently to have staff on site to supervise QC at the factory, due to COVID issues in China. There have been reports of QC issues affecting products of various manufacturers. Those which seem to be having the least issues seem to be those like Kader (Bachmann) which are Chinese-owned and so have local senior staff to oversee production. Hornby have used several different Chinese suppliers since Sanda Kan went bankrupt and were purchased by Kader. I notice they often refer to models being "out to tender" for the tooling. If this also applies to production, one wonders what the basis is for accepting a tender and whether such a process is conducive to good quality.

The LNER didn't itself build 4- or 6-wheel coaches, but inherited some from its predecessors — I believe the ex-GE ones were the last survivors. Some of Peter Paye's books on GER branch lines contain drawings of the stock used, which may in some cases include such stock.

The major commercial manufacturers solved the problem of having all the wheels flanged and still getting round sharp curves almost 50 years ago in the U.K. — that's why the flangeless wheels disappeared …

If the tool is catching on the sleepers, that suggests it is expecting higher rather than lower profile rail, I'd have thought. Proses make ballast spreaders for OO/HO and N. Don't know whether they do TT as well or not.

It would be more appropriate to refer to the Princess Coronation or "Duchess" class to avoid confusion with the earlier LMS Pacifics.

The only thing is, the Tyne Dock arches would only be impressive from the road; each individual arch would of course carry one or at most two lines. Mostly if not wholly a place where coal was tipped into ships. In reality the passenger terminal was/is on the opposite side of the river at the Albert Edward Dock, although at one time quite large ships came upriver as far as Newcastle Quayside, just short of the Swing Bridge.

I'm wondering if some of the issues are down to the way these locomotives have been designed. They're designed in the same way OO gauge steam locos would be: one axle is driven directly, and the connecting rods drive the others. N gauge steam locos are not designed in this way. Generally all wheels are driven directly through gears—the connecting rods are just along for the ride. I've no idea what general TT practice is.

I think the range are pretty close to 1:148 scale (British N). Indeed they did a range of models a few years back specifically intended for N gauge model railway use, but after a lot of initial publicity, the range just disappeared from view. Are Lilliput Lane even still in business?

What I meant was, if the coupling is in its mount, the hook can't come loose. But if you remove it then it can and will. It's worth pointing out that Dapol easi-shunt couplings can lose their springs.

I'm not sure that the hook can drop out — unless you know different — but replacement couplings are supplied in kit form, and the hook is very thin; I can just about pick it up and assemble one of the couplings but my tweezers can't hold it. There aren't many alternatives to Dapol anyway; the standard N gauge couplings aren't easy to shunt with, and as for the 009 couplings that also fit the pocket, it's worth noting that one of the largest 009 layouts — Ted Polet's Craigcorrie and Dunalastair — uses N gauge couplings…

I'm not sure that the word "scale" is especially relevant to the Tri-ang "Transcontinental" range anyway :-) Much more recently, Minitrains range of narrow gauge models follow the old Matchbox notion of "the scale that fits in the box".

Several ex-LMS Pacifics were given a red (maroon) livery post-1956; the red "City of London" once in the H-D range was prototypical, and several others were given this livery as well.

You can see why Tri-ang adopted 3mm scale… the type 2 is roughly the same size as the "Ludmilla".

The problem with the couplings, I expect, is due to their being close couplings. The idea is that they lock rigidly together, and the "kinematic" mechanism moves the vehicles further apart on a curve. Without such a mechanism they will cause derailments. Most of the NEM coupling boxes are intended to be used with such an arrangement, but in other scales the standard couplings — tension lock, NEM 360 (hook/loop), and the Arnold coupling in N gauge, don't lock rigidly together. As a result many OO and N gauge British models don't have the kinematic mechanism. In OO/HO you can (or could) get adaptors to provide such a mechanism. I don’t know whether there is anything for N gauge (the TT and N gauge NEM boxes are the same). Kadee don't do N or TT couplings. N gauge are done by Micro-Trains; once part of Kadee but the twin brothers who ran the company fell out and went separate ways. Your best bet might be the Dapol "easi-shunt" couplings. They will fit in a N or TT gauge NEM box, and there is a conversion kit for non-NEM fitted stock. This doesn't provide a kinematic mechanism however. It's available in different lengths — you'll need a trial and error approach to find which length is needed in each case. But they aren't cheap.

There are some stations in the U.K. where a full turntable was used for loco release, two in NE England — Alston (ex-NE) and Rothbury (ex-NB). The one at Alston was removed some considerable time before closure; there was a loop further out from the station where trains could be run round. The turntable at Alston was rather small, so it's possible that the locos being used (J39s and standard 3MT 2-6-0s) were too long.