What About The Bee

Hi WeyMatt The purpose of the exercise is to get you to understand polarity and how to control it manually. Automation happens after that! No one is slipping out of the conversation. I'm also fairly comfortable asserting that there has been no offense taken in this thread, by anyone or by any means! You are just fine as you are. When you present the requested diagrams, there will be many who will chime in. Probably to correct me 😉. Bee

Hi OP6 While you wait for Hornby to produce the required item, perhaps you would consider making the step coupler yourself. Determine the vertical step you need. Get two couplers. Cut one to obtain the NEM clip, cut the other to obtain the Roco coupling less the NEM clip. Install the vertical step, using small screws to connect all three parts, to inhibit shear of the pieces. Viola! A step coupling, of the desired flavor. Eventually (?? maybe ??) Hornby will produce the required part. You can substitute the factory produced coupling when (?? if ??) it arrives. Personally, I would be more satisfied with my own rather than the factory item, as it would demonstrate my mastery of the situation. Your mileage may vary of course. Bee

Hi WeyMatt I think 96RAF and I get along just fine. 96RAF, naturally, may speak for himself. Technical discussions are not indicative of personal rancor. Model railways have many facets and we are always learning, all of us. Some are further along the curve than others. In simple fact, I am quite appreciative of the vast knowledge base displayed. The discussions here are meant in a genial sense. Treat them thusly, and you too will get along! Now go do your homework and present us with the diagrams 🙂. We will get you to the next level but your cooperation is needed. Cheers Bee

Hi 96RAF At this juncture, I am making an attempt at showing WeyMatt what a short is and the very basics of how to deal with it. After an extensive exhange of messages, we have at last arrived at the root of WeyMatt's issue, to wit, polarity. We shall not speak of his temerity in disobedience of SWMBO, but following the Admiral's direction is advised 😉 I know every lad here can draw the circuit. The ladies too. What I am trying to do is teach WeyMatt how to do it. There are indeed 1000 ways to skin a cat. Let us show WeyMatt the first way. Bee

Hi Alberto 👋. Always nice to see progress on your layout. You say "Finished". Is a layout ever finished????? I don't think that is possible! Bee

Hi Matthew 👋. Let us suppose the most simple of situations. We have a straight run of track. Perfectly straight, no points, nothing. Just a straight. In the middle of that straight is a gap. This gap provides electrical isolation. You could use insulated rail joiners here, but this is not necessary for our experiment. We will wire this layout such that when at the northern end, headed south, the right rail is +. When at the southern end, headed north, the right rail is +. Now if you are following along, you will notice that at the gap + faces -, for both tracks. If you were to command the locomotive across the gap, you will electrically short the controller at the gap, because + is connected to -. Full stop. Draw this and study it until you understand what I am showing you. This is an electrically short. It removes all the air out of the layout balloon. Suppose we had a way to flip the electrical polarity (change + to -, and - to +) when we wanted to go onto the track after the gap. Then, when the locomotive crosses the gap, + meets + and - meets -. Naturally, you would need this on both the southern and northern end of our straight. In direct current (analog), you will require a double pole, double throw switch on both the northern and southern end of our straight to make this work. Full stop, if you do not know what a DPDT switch is, go get a diagram from the internet and learn how they work. There are literally thousands of explanations on the internet of how they function. You should be able, at the end of this exercise, be able to drive from the northern end to the southern end, and visa versa, without creating a short. Keep going until you can draw the diagram of the wiring. Now if you are in Digital Command and Control, there are far more elegant solutions. In DCC, you command the loco, not the track. A device, such as a frog juicer, automatically switches the track polarity for you. Before you jump to a frog juicer, though, learn the basics. Bee

Hi Matthew 👋. There are a thousand ways to skin a cat. The cat doesn't like many of them. Here is how I check for return loops. Not "the" way, just the way I do it. Take out two colored pencils. The colors don't matter, but they should contrast. Say red and blue. Pick some spot on your layout. Pick out one of the two rails, say the right rail. Right, Red. Pick up red and start tracing your right rail. Keep going in the same direction until you have all the right rails colored red. Do the same for the left rail, only this time in blue. Left, Blue. Every time red meets blue, you have a polarity issue, which requires attending to. Fishy already spotted two, and you should find those quite readily. Are there others? Consider frog polarity at each point/turnout. When you trace your rails, red will meet blue at every point/turnout. Every one. I get the sense that you are just starting out on your model railway adventure. If so, welcome aboard!! If not, please disregard the following. Starting with a very large and complicated layout, such as the one you present, is bound to prove a monumental task that will burn out the person attempting it. It is entirely too big for a relative newcomer. Start smaller and learn all the tasks required, such that when you do understand what and how, you can build the layout you present. Apologies to all cat lovers. No cats were skinned in the writing of this post. Bee

Arithmetic mistakes can creep into anyone's calculation 96RAF. Especially mine! 🤷‍♂️ Long ago, I grovelled at the feet of a true genius. The man had 50, count em, 50 US patents. I was one of his reports. He would question every mathematical result I put before him, demanding that I put the numbers (with units) on a piece of paper. This was no use of course, when presented with such a calculation written out, he would say "Those are just numbers on a piece of paper". Quite the character. Hi Matthew 👋. Anyone who can come up with such a complicated layout, over multiple levels, surely does not need to be told how to return to lower levels. The play value will be something only you can answer. If it were me, I'd call the incline the Wapping Tunnel, and have it directly in front the operator. This presents as a "half tunnel" you can see inside, with the cavity lined with the material of your choice. Some lights on the wayside and it becomes an attractive feature, a different perspective. But hey ho, that's just me. Bee

Hi 96RAF Isn't the incline measured as rise over run? For a rise of 12" over 560", I get 12/560 = 0.0214. Multiply by 100 to get 2.1% Am I doing this wrong? Bee

I check in periodically to items I have on preorder. R40357 Queen Adelaide Saloon, with Globe and Wellington 1st class has taken a schedule delay. The due date was previously Summer, 2023. I did think that was an aggressive schedule. In the listing, the image is of the real Saloon, in the museum. Even now, in February, not even a CAD image. The due date, er, season of the year is now Summer, 2024. I do suppose it could be argued that the Summer, 2023 season was an error that they just now discovered. I'm going to pretend that's the reason. Bee

Hi Ralphy 👋. A simple multimeter will be very useful to any enthusiast. While you can spend a lot, you don't need to. The cheap and cheerful one is all you need. If we toss out mechanical binding issues, then this sounds more like an electrical issue. I agree with LT&SR_NSE, a diagram of some sort would be useful. It doesn't have to be an elegant diagram, just a sketch will get us going. I should also like to know what locomotive you are using, as the pickups and their spacing may prove significant. Bee And get a multimeter!

1) since the locomotives can traverse either set of points when going from 3rd to 2nd radius ciruit, we can eliminate point geometry issues. The locomotives and point geometries must be within spec. 2) if the locomotives can traverse from 2nd radius to 1st radius circuit at high speed, then we can eliminate polarity issues. The locomotive does not suddenly try to reverse, from the description, it carries on. Possible issues A) do you have a small electric dead zone, but only at the 2nd to 1st radius circuit? A locomotive at speed may get beyond that dead zone, where a slow locomotive may not. Test with a multimeter for good voltage throughout the interchange. B) the location of the point may present binding. That is, as the locomotive is in the point, it leads directly into a 1st radius curve. The spec on most modern locomotives is R2, not R1. Is it possible that the locomotive is binding? Push the locomotive through by hand and feel for retarding force. Feel free to reject these causes, because you have already checked it. Bee

Hi 3Link I do take on board your comments vis longevity of cloth curtains. There is no doubt that cloth curtains exposed to the environment simply will not last. I think these types of carriages were seasonal only. Late spring, summer, early autumn. Too cold to otherwise be practical. Perhaps 16 weeks before it was simply too cold for 1st class passengers. We do not observe curtained carriages for long in the record and the longevity issue, even for leather, may have spelled their end. I don't know if you caught the post about the Walker print and 2nd class carriages. It was a ridiculous oversight, I hadn't properly observed the wheels and completely misidentified the carriage in question. I correct it here https://uk.hornby.com/community/forum/henry-booth-and-the-new-hornby-lmr-carriage-338251?ccm_paging_p=3#end-of-replies In my defense, the way the artist depicted the light, with the consist being in both bright light and shadow, fooled my eye. Other than that, I plead lunacy! Bridges and beams are designed for a load. Modern material science permits fine design with minimal material, but certainly Stephenson did not have that luxury. He did a fabulous job, given the state of mechanical engineering and material science of his time. Cast iron is brittle. Steel is not. The difference is in the way the material reacts to loads. Materials bend like a spring until they reach what is called 'yield', when deformation occurs. If force continues to be applied, it can reach what is called 'ultimate tensile strength' when rupture and failure occurs. Brittle describes materials in which yield and ultimate tensile strength are fairly close to each other, that is, when the material deforms, it ruptures. That is cast iron. Steel is not brittle, that is, yield is sufficiently far from ultimate tensile strength such that steel bends long before it ruptures. When designing a bridge for loads, material selection as well as the load case must be carefully selected. Simply placing the load mid beam will not do. Suppose the locomotive bounces over a join in the track. When it comes down, shock loading due to deceleration of the locomotive on the rail will occur. It is important to provide the proper time sample, or the initial shock load case can be missed. High G forces, say 20G, can be readily observed. So a 4 ton locomotive suddenly becomes an 80 ton locomotive. And yes, the material in the design is considered homogeneous, without internal defect. Cast iron would not be my ideal choice for any high loading. Stephenson rejected cast iron rails. He had no choice for the bridges, except stone. Is there some reference for LMR period manner of dress? When I try googling it, I get such a bewildering swirl of costume that it is difficult to make heads or tails of it. I can see passengers here and there, but I am at a loss. What about aristocracy, like the Duke of Wellington? Queen Adelaide? Rich merchant? Laborer? Etc. What is correct? Bee

Hi Mahoganydog 👋. Now that you have confirmed the image, I had a very close look at the model. It looks to be inside cylinder, of the Stephenson Patentee type, 2-2-2. The Patentee type proved its merit and appeared simply everywhere. I can see it is a fairly early locomotive, the footplate is surrounded only by a lovely railing. As to the exact locomotive, I will be unable to get much further than that without a much better image. Perhaps someone could get a better image? The photo reveals that the model is on a presentation board and it has a plaque identifying the locomotive. So it isn't a nondescript generic locomotive. Perhaps it is Patentee! Rev. Sam is an enthusiast after all. ÷÷÷ Probably the finest model I have ever seen is this https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co27881/model-of-firefly-class-locomotive-about-1840-model-representation It is a 1:8 model of a Fire Fly class locomotive, presented to Daniel Gooch, Superintendent of the GWR. When observing the square nuts, recognize that they aren't just molded detail, rather, they are threaded and tightened as any nut would be. It is my working theory that these early models are actually shop direction. That is, to communicate to the workmen what to build, they used models not prints. Literacy and high education would not have been associated men in the shop, likely they started working in their early teenage years and education stopped. So how is the literate engineer, working from detailed plans to communicate those ideas? A model. Bee

What JJ doesn't tell us in this thread, but does in the video, is that this was a train set that JJ's Dad bought him when he was 8 years old. What JJ is sharing here is a very special and treasured memento of his childhood and his father. The set could use a bit of sprucing up, maybe a touch of repair, but that is unimportant. Irrelevant. In my eyes, its perfect. I found this video immensely touching. Thank you for sharing it JJ. Bee

I found this screen grab. @Mahoganydog-Is this the one you are referring to? Bee

When the LMR was authorized by Parliament, the Board appointed George and John Rennie as the principal Engineers of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway. Stephenson was not selected, as the surveys performed by George were found defective. The Rennies chose Charles Vignoles, surveyor, to correct those defects. After a fair degree of politics at the LMR, the Rennies were out and George was back in. As Stephenson resumed control, his new subordinate Vignoles was forced out. Vignoles then found himself as Engineer in the development of the St Helens & Runcorn Railway, authorized by Parliment in 1830. Many will have seen that railway and not have known they were observing it. The St Helens & Runcorn is the railway on the famous Intersection Bridge. The LMR passes underneath the bridge. The first railway to cross another railway NOT at a level crossing, because George Stephenson demanded it go either over or under the LMR. Equally renowned for being a girder bridge of cast iron beams. Why the excitement over a mundane girder bridge? The deflection of a cast iron beam was the subject of empirical studies during the early 1800s, analytic solutions were simply not possible then. What shape was the best? Compressive strength is greater than the tensile strength in cast iron. Big solid beams would work, but are entirely wasteful of material. The solution is an I-beam with a larger cross-sectional area in the lower web to account for the weaker tensile strength. They did find this solution by trial and error, yet to optimize the solution, they required composite beam theory; something far beyond their time. Stephenson boldly utilized the new cast iron beams, when stone arch bridges were ubiquitous. An astonishing achievement, an LMR marvel executed at the Water Street Bridge in Manchester. The Water Street Bridge is featured in many period illustrations. The Water Street Bridge preceeded the Intersection Bridge and served as inspiration. With Stephenson's requirement of over or under, Vignoles submitted plans for the Intersection Bridge to the LMR Board in 1831 and Stephenson approved them. A single line crossed the bridge, widened to 2 lines in 1850. The locomotive on top of Intersection Bridge looks to be of the "William the Fourth" class*, by Braithwaite and Ericsson. William the Fourth class were originally intended for the LMR, but were incapable of meeting LMR contractual obligations. B&E sold them on to St Helens & Runcorn Railway. This image has the tender in the correct orientation for the William the Fourth class. In the well known image, the tender is on the wrong end of the locomotive! Possibly we can forgive the artist, as the locomotive has an unusual configuration. The bridge was the center of attention, not the locomotive. The artist did manage to render the details of the tender correctly. The St Helens & Runcorn Railway was constructed to handle freight, coal in particular. After public demand, passenger carriages were coupled to the end of freight trains. Charles Vignoles provides us with this marvelous image, certainly of the St Helens & Runcorn Railway. Novelty** worked the St Helens & Runcorn Railway after the Rainhill Trials and is key indicator of what we are examining. Novelty was manufactured by Braithwaite and Ericsson, as was the "William the Fourth" class. Novelty is shown with a representative consist. Freight is present, with one item clearly labeled "wool". The two trailing railway wagons are personal carriage wagons. The passengers in the riding compartments of the personal carriages are all of upper social status, given the exorbitant cost of this mode of transportation. Which leaves us with the "Railway Omnibus" in the center. The male passengers of the Railway Omnibus all appear to be in tophats, and the standing individual has a jacket with tails and high waisted trousers. I believe the standing individual was known as a dandy. The seated lady on the left has a headdress of the same type as those in the personal carriages. Are we looking at passengers of high social standing? I think so. No one is bundled up for the cold, it must be warm out, suggesting summer. Does the Railway Omnibus represent 1st class? Probably, but not certainly. Which at last, brings us to the curtains. Curtains, see! The Railway Omnibus is shown with curtains. The valence is draped beautifully for each of the two compartments as well as the central passageway. Examine the curtains behind the seated passengers, its an enclosure. While the enclosure material could be anything, the draped valence is more suggestive of cloth. This has been a long way around to saying that curtains could be of cloth, and not necessarily leather, as they were on LMR 1st Queen Adelaide. Cloth curtains are plausible. I note that the Hornby illustration is merely a CAD render. While the curtain color Hornby have presented for the Booth Carriage in R30090 is within the realm of possibility, my personal preference would be something else. The Booth illustration is black and white. The colors we do see on period engravings are limited by that process. Those engravings absolutely do have color variation between prints, so we cannot even be certain of the colors we do see! Whatever color Hornby finally does select will be acceptable, since an accurate color will never be known. Yet, a rare image of Novelty on the mainline after Rainhill, the fantastic Intersection & Water Street Bridges, and the Railroad Omnibus could not be passed up. Bee *Not on my wishlist. YMMV. **Novelty is very high on my wishlist, as are all Rainhill competitors like San Pareil, Cycloped and Perseverance. https://uk.hornby.com/community/forum/200th-anniversary-rainhill-trials-1829-2029-328559 I've even gone so far as to identify the carriages used at Rainhill, used by all the competitors, within that thread. Enjoy!

Earlier, I wrote: ÷÷÷÷ Yet of the 46 class carriages in 2nd class, only 1 is depicted with curtains, to wit: the Walker drawing in Olive Mount with the same curious backward facing Guard. The 2nd class carriage appears to be the 6 forward facing rows and is identified by the unique door arrangement. So one of forty six. While curtains are associated with 1st class carriages, they are only weakly associated with 2nd class carriages ÷÷÷÷ My intellectual honesty demands that I correct my error. Anomalies always attract attention, and as I continued to study the image, I noticed something which essentially changes everything. First, we will examine all carriages for round bottom doors, and accept only those with a superstructure. It turns out there are only two. For all but the Duke of Wellington's ceremonial carriage, there are only two axles per carriage. No carriages have more that two, except the Duke's. By this, we can see that there are 8 axles, and therefore 4 carriages Counting the number of round bottom doors, per carriage, we can see that there are 3 per carriage in the Walker image. Now examine the superstructure. There are four uprights in each of the two carriage Consequently, I now state that the two carriages we see in the Walker Image are Booth carriages, to be found in R30090. Since those Booth carriages are considered 1st class by myself, due to the enclosing curtains, I now find ZERO 2nd class carriages with curtains. Bee

Here is generation 3. When testing the previous generation, I found that if the locomotive stuttered, the consist would accordion forward. If the drag chains were too high, they would be forced up and off the peg, decoupling the carriage. As you can see, the horizontal member is now at the height of the plate, and the top of my peg has a slight inward angle. I subjected these to violent testing. I coupled the old Hornby to the new Hornby carriage using the drag chain. I then rapidly moved the new Hornby carriage back and forth on the track, attempting to decouple. It would not! Mission Accomplished Final Design Bee

Earlier in this thread, I asked about the locomotive and the consist for the Queen's Saloon. After research, I think I can answer some of my own questions and would like to share that with you. The London and Birmingham Railway only existed until 1846, when it was amalgamated into the London and North Western Railway (L&NWR). As Queen Adelaide's saloon was created in 1842, we have a very small window to consider indeed, 1842 to 1846. The Engineer for the London and Birmingham Railway was Edward Bury. He specified 2-2-0 for passenger and 0-4-0* for freight, naturally of his design. It is very probable that the locomotive used for Queen Adelaide's Saloon looked like this There is no definitive word on the consist of Queen Adelaide's train, but Queen Victoria's first train ride, dated 13 June 1842, via the GWR will be instructive. The locomotive engineer was Daniel Gooch, himself, Superintendent of the GWR. I do not think anyone can blame him for taking that honor. The consist was 7 carriages, with Her Majesty's carriage two back from the locomotive, which was Phlegethon. Phlegethon was a member of the Fire Fly class, as was Actaeon. We have a photograph of Actaeon, designed by Daniel Gooch. A question later asked in Parliament about the journey confirmed that the two carriages between the royal carriage and the engine was in case of an accident as those two carriages would act as a buffer to the royal carriage. I do think that Queen Adelaide would have been afforded near identical treatment on the London and Birmingham Railway. Very likely that buffer carriages were in place and that there were other carriages for support staff. And with that, a Bury 2-2-0 passenger locomotive enters my wish list! Bee * Copperknob, Furness Railway No. 3, is an example of a Bury 0-4-0

That was meant to be supportive of the moderators. Even if you do not wish that to be publicly discussed, the moderators should at least examine the content of my now erased post. It represents a technical argument to be used when the moderators discuss the issue with the Hornby IT staff. Erasing my post doesn't alter its content. Sure, others cannot see it, but it is true nonetheless. My apologies if you took offense RDS. It certainly wasn't meant that way. Bee

I'm going to offer an incredibly simple solution. RDS Moderator Note: Your suggestion for a little game has been removed. It is not clever to try to suggest ways around what has been an accepted way to run the Forum, years before you arrived on the scene.

@DRC Did you go for all four articulated pairs (R40223/4/5/6) and the observation car? That will be a stunning rake indeed! In the event that you did (and I am so guessing), please do share when they arrive! Bee

The Booth Carriage, a question of Class Class is defined herein as level of service, not social standing. While it is tempting to associate high social standing with 1st class trains, this is easily disproven. 2nd class trains were the local trains, stopping at intermediate stations along the way. One could purchase a "six inside" fare for 2nd class trains, thereby getting a 1st class carriage on a second class train. What I'd like to investigate here is the presence of curtains on the Booth illustrated carriage that will appear in R30090. What does this indicate for the level of service or the class of carriage? In another thread, I discussed the LMR Queen Adelaide carriage, to be found in wishlists. LMR Queen Adelaide carriage; Not to be confused with Her Majesty's Saloon Clearly a 1st class carriage and definitely had curtains, as shown. Those 4 summer carriages had curtains to permit a breeze during the heat. We have the diary entry of one Miss Kennedy, of 1833, in which she names several 1st class carriages, but insists that they were all shut up and further "We preferred a more open one, that only had curtains to the sides". By this statement, we can see Miss Kennedy had the choice between enclosed 1st class carriages and curtained carriages, and expressed her preference. From the evidence of the prior two paragraphs, I will assert that curtains are associated with 1st class carriages. Is that exclusive? So what about known 2nd class carriages? There are plenty of illustrations. Indeed, I can identify forty six 2nd class carriages. The early 2nd class carriages had no roof and were the equivalent of stagecoach outside passengers. You sat in the environment for a cheaper fare, rain or shine. Within a few years, 2nd class carriages gained a front and rear walls and a roof, to protect passengers from embers. Yet of the 46 class carriages in 2nd class, only 1 is depicted with curtains, to wit: the Walker drawing in Olive Mount with the same curious backward facing Guard. The 2nd class carriage appears to be the 6 forward facing rows and is identified by the unique door arrangement. So one of forty six. While curtains are associated with 1st class carriages, they are only weakly associated with 2nd class carriages. We must remember that the Booth illustration appeared in 1830, when 2nd class carriages were literally outside seating. No walls, no roof, nothing to protect the passenger. The earliest Ackermann prints show exactly this and they are published AFTER the Booth illustration. Booth clearly illustrated on that same page a 2nd class carriage. But notice, no roof, no walls, no curtains. I think evidence convincing, but as mentioned, I am not ready to die on this hill. I solicit your views and evidence. Bee

In a different thread, we investigated Queen Adelaide's personal saloon. That carriage will appear in R40357. But Queen Adelaide's saloon is not what this thread is about. The LMR had a first class carriage named "Queen Adelaide", which was constructed for the passenger trade. There are two excellent drawings of this carriage. Here is the better detailed of the two, unfortunately in black and white. Bury/Ackermann has "Queen Adelaide" in yellow, indicating that the carriage is a 1st class. Once again, three compartments, with 6 seating per compartment. We can see 3 passengers seated in the last compartment. What is unusual about the Queen Adelaide 1st Class carriage is that only the middle compartment is a glass compartment, the other two are open! The leather curtains could be drawn in case of inclement weather. This carriage was used in the hot summer months, per LMR records. There were three other 1st class carriages like this, "[Royal] William", "Croxteth" and "Fair Trader". So these four 1st class carriages are not the standard, but represent a deviation from standard. Open First Class! A summer's breeze to cool roasting passengers. I think the fare would still be termed "six inside", for 5 shillings, as these are indeed 1st class carriages per LMR records. If we examine the unusual carriage depicted by Henry Booth in 1830, I note similar curtains. That is, the carriage need not be enclosed to be a 1st class carriage. So this represents a potential extra carriage that Hornby could include in a train pack. This would indeed be new tooling, except for the undercarriage so it may be some time coming. Fingers crossed, someday!! Bee