reddragons Christmas advent.

[Peter C]

Ruby Series PowerPal for use with DCC90/91/94/95-Gaugemaster-DCC99 | Gaugemaster

Gaugemaster:DCC99 Ruby Series PowerPal for use with DCC90/91/94/95 - Gaugemaster DCC99

www.gaugemasterretail.com

View attachment 86961

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Dec 2020 ==

Today its DC electric for day 12

A Lima class 73, another good runner and an easy DCC conversion!

View attachment 87017

That looks really nice - 73s are engines I've had an interest for a while so I've been looking for a model of one for quite some time. You saying the Lima one is a good DCC conversion makes me think such a model would be best for my layout.

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

That looks really nice - 73s are engines I've had an interest for a while so I've been looking for a model of one for quite some time. You saying the Lima one is a good DCC conversion makes me think such a model would be best for my layout.

-Peter

They don't have excellent slow speed control, but they are great runners, good pullers. You do have to solder in the DCC, but I use a harness so not to cut the DCC chip plug!

Probably when all this silly business is over, the group of us should meet up to 'play' on each others layouts!

 

[43055]

Today its DC electric for day 12

A Lima class 73, another good runner and an easy DCC conversion!

View attachment 87017

They are defiantly a good runner as my dad has one. I think the one he has a big dot on the roof which was used to track it when it was on the royal train.

 

[Peter C]

They are defiantly a good runner as my dad has one. I think the one he has a big dot on the roof which was used to track it when it was on the royal train.

That sounds like a cool addition to a loco - I've always been interested in the way the LNER painted 'FLYING SCOTSMAN' on the roof of several 'teak' coaches to show the pilot of a plane carrying filmcrew which train was the special one in 1932ish and that sounds like a (fairly) modern version.

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

13th is a Hornby Class 86.

The easiest of DCC conversions as you can simply unplug 2 wires, plug in an 8-pin harness and plug in the chip!

This isn't a loco that's likely to last out 2021 on my railway. Apart from the fact it's outside of my modelled area with no 86 ever venturing onto Western or Southern, being an old Hornby loco it just doesn't have the pulling power to haul the rakes of coaches or wagons I have on its own, so eBay will beckon at some point.



Apart from that its a nice loco that would suit a smaller railway.

 

[Peter C]

13th is a Hornby Class 86.

The easiest of DCC conversions as you can simply unplug 2 wires, plug in an 8-pin harness and plug in the chip!

This isn't a loco that's likely to last out 2021 on my railway. Apart from the fact it's outside of my modelled area with no 86 ever venturing onto Western or Southern, being an old Hornby loco it just doesn't have the pulling power to haul the rakes of coaches or wagons I have on its own, so eBay will beckon at some point.

View attachment 87055

Apart from that its a nice loco that would suit a smaller railway.

That looks like another nice engine - looking at the roof it seems to be able to run off OLE or track? My Class 91 does that although I've not tried it as of yet.

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

That looks like another nice engine - looking at the roof it seems to be able to run off OLE or track? My Class 91 does that although I've not tried it as of yet.

-Peter

Older models used to have the ability to power off the OLE. It gave you a second controller on the same track in DC days, no longer needed.

The drawback was if the loco was the wrong way around something would go #BANG#

 

[Cowley]

Older models used to have the ability to power off the OLE. It gave you a second controller on the same track in DC days, no longer needed.

The drawback was if the loco was the wrong way around something would go #BANG#

So did you have live OHLE at some point then?

 

[reddragon]

So did you have live OHLE at some point then?

No, by the time I got my 2 locos with capability I was too old and approaching moving out into my own house

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Dec 2020 ==

Its the 14th and my last electric loco, which does sort of fit the Southern Region.

The Class 92 is the Hornby motored follow on of the Lima model. It does run smoother & quieter than a Lima model but I've yet to test this loco under a heavy load.
I had this one DCC converted at the model shop because the motor is not isolated, so a fair bit of work that I couldn't find instructions for was needed.



== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Dec 2020 ==

Today is the 15th advent!

A Bachmann MPV is the dish of the day. The easiest DCC conversion of all as you simply lift off the motor cover, install the 21-pin chip & put the cover back!



As you would imagine, those side fences do not remain straight and the containers fall off.

 

[Cowley]

Nice! I just checked in case your posts had merged again (pm me the next time you post one and I’ll reply).

 

[reddragon]

Nice! I just checked in case your posts had merged again (pm me the next time you post one and I’ll reply).

I post every morning c8.30

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2020 ==

16th for 1st Gen DMUs

A Hornby class 101. This was my first successful DCC conversion, simple as it had a socket! Runs well, looks good



Next is my old Hornby class 110. Another easy DCC conversion using a harness & plugs to add so no soldering. Doesn't run as well as the newer Hornby though but for its era is a very good model. Being outside of my modelling area is likely to go on eBay in 2021.

 

[Cowley]

DMU heaven. I always liked the Hornby 110, it was a great looking model for its time.

 

[hexagon789]

I post every morning c8.30

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2020 ==

16th for 1st Gen DMUs

A Hornby class 101. This was my first successful DCC conversion, simple as it had a socket! Runs well, looks good

View attachment 87198

Next is my old Hornby class 110. Another easy DCC conversion using a harness & plugs to add so no soldering. Doesn't run as well as the newer Hornby though but for its era is a very good model. Being outside of my modelling area is likely to go on eBay in 2021.

View attachment 87199

It is a nice model, though sadly not quite what I need. I did also like your weathered Western on the previous page.

It was that which prompted me some days ago to seriously consider obtaining one as out of region as it would be.

 

[Peter C]

I post every morning c8.30

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2020 ==

16th for 1st Gen DMUs

A Hornby class 101. This was my first successful DCC conversion, simple as it had a socket! Runs well, looks good

View attachment 87198

Next is my old Hornby class 110. Another easy DCC conversion using a harness & plugs to add so no soldering. Doesn't run as well as the newer Hornby though but for its era is a very good model. Being outside of my modelling area is likely to go on eBay in 2021.

View attachment 87199

I've got an old Triang DMU of some description (I believe we'd now call it a Class 101 or similar but at the time it was simply a 'Diesel Multiple Unit') in BR green but not a newer Hornby one. I've seen a few online and seeing as it's easy to DCC fit, I'll put it on the Hattons wishlist! The Class 110 you gave me is also a really cool unit, just perfect for my layout. It's that model that's got me that bit more interested in first-generation DMUs!

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

I've got an old Triang DMU of some description (I believe we'd now call it a Class 101 or similar but at the time it was simply a 'Diesel Multiple Unit') in BR green but not a newer Hornby one. I've seen a few online and seeing as it's easy to DCC fit, I'll put it on the Hattons wishlist! The Class 110 you gave me is also a really cool unit, just perfect for my layout. It's that model that's got me that bit more interested in first-generation DMUs!

-Peter

The Triang DMU is not a class 101, but is a very similar but older Metro-Cammell unit in the 79xxx number series, with many older features, different lights, coupling codes etc.

The class 110 is the easiest DCC fit you can get. It needed a good clean though and missing bits fitting!

 

[Peter C]

The Triang DMU is not a class 101, but is a very similar but older Metro-Cammell unit in the 79xxx number series, with many older features, different lights, coupling codes etc.

The class 110 is the easiest DCC fit you can get. It needed a good clean though and missing bits fitting!

Ah OK - I actually think I've read that somewhere else online as well now you say that. The main issue for me in understanding first-gen DMUs is the use of classes for each type of unit early on, with the types instead being called 'Metro-Cammell 3-car DMU' in trainspotting books or whatever. I've still got a lot to learn!
I'll look into DCC fitting that 110 then. I've cleaned bits of it but it needs a proper good clean and overall service, as you say. A job for over Christmas/New Year I think...

-Peter

 

[hexagon789]

Ah OK - I actually think I've read that somewhere else online as well now you say that. The main issue for me in understanding first-gen DMUs is the use of classes for each type of unit early on, with the types instead being called 'Metro-Cammell 3-car DMU' in trainspotting books or whatever. I've still got a lot to learn!
I'll look into DCC fitting that 110 then. I've cleaned bits of it but it needs a proper good clean and overall service, as you say. A job for over Christmas/New Year I think...

-Peter

Try the railcar website, everything you ever wanted or needed to know about first generation mechanical DMUs can be found there.

The Triang DMU is not a class 101, but is a very similar but older Metro-Cammell unit in the 79xxx number series, with many older features, different lights, coupling codes etc.

I think they were coded Yellow Diamond, they saw use in East Anglia iirc and were obsolete almost as soon as the entered service having a control system all future build units were incompatible with

 

[Peter C]

Try the railcar website, everything you ever wanted or needed to know about first generation mechanical DMUs can be found there.

Ah brilliant, I'll check it out - I'll see if I can learn something about them over Christmas too.

Thanks,

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

Ah OK - I actually think I've read that somewhere else online as well now you say that. The main issue for me in understanding first-gen DMUs is the use of classes for each type of unit early on, with the types instead being called 'Metro-Cammell 3-car DMU' in trainspotting books or whatever. I've still got a lot to learn!
I'll look into DCC fitting that 110 then. I've cleaned bits of it but it needs a proper good clean and overall service, as you say. A job for over Christmas/New Year I think...

-Peter

1st Gen DMUs were classes 100-129, the names are the body manufacturers. To complicate matters class 102 became class 101, class 106 became class 105 etc as they were essentially the same.

Classes 140 to 150 were the driving trailer cars of the motors, later renumbered to the same as the motors, and classes 160-189 were the centre trailers, again renumbered the same as the motors!

Older units from Derby, MCW & the Railbuses never got class numbers etc but the Class 126 Swindon units built under old design standards, some of which were upgraded from 79xxx standards to 5xxx standards but not renumbered.

Clear????

 

[Peter C]

1st Gen DMUs were classes 100-129, the names are the body manufacturers. To complicate matters class 102 became class 101, class 106 became class 105 etc as they were essentially the same.

Classes 140 to 150 were the driving trailer cars of the motors, later renumbered to the same as the motors, and classes 160-189 were the centre trailers, again renumbered the same as the motors!

Older units from Derby, MCW & the Railbuses never got class numbers etc but the Class 126 Swindon units built under old design standards, some of which were upgraded from 79xxx standards to 5xxx standards but not renumbered.

Clear????

All still a bit baffling (not to discredit your explanation!), but it's probably one of those things I'll understand once I've spent ages reading about it and getting really, really interested in. Happens a lot with various things.

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

All still a bit baffling (not to discredit your explanation!), but it's probably one of those things I'll understand once I've spent ages reading about it and getting really, really interested in. Happens a lot with various things.

-Peter

It's a long read! Try understanding Southern units, that's far more complex!

 

[hexagon789]

1st Gen DMUs were classes 100-129, the names are the body manufacturers. To complicate matters class 102 became class 101, class 106 became class 105 etc as they were essentially the same.

I believe that was because originally they had different engines, but when the fleet was homogenised the decision was sensibly taken to merge the classes.

Classes 140 to 150 were the driving trailer cars of the motors, later renumbered to the same as the motors, and classes 160-189 were the centre trailers, again renumbered the same as the motors!

Many foreign rail systems still do this - treat trailers and driving trailers as seperate classes.

Older units from Derby, MCW & the Railbuses never got class numbers etc but the Class 126 Swindon units built under old design standards, some of which were upgraded from 79xxx standards to 5xxx standards but not renumbered.

The Edinburgh-Glasgow 79xxx never became 126s as such being withdrawn in 1971 except a handful of cars sent to Ayr once the E&G fleet was replaced by loco-haulage. The Ayrshire fleet is what became the Class 126.

Clear????

Yes!

But I agree the general arrangement is complex and can be confusing without study.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2020 ==

It's a long read! Try understanding Southern units, that's far more complex!

But equally as interesting!

 

[Peter C]

It's a long read! Try understanding Southern units, that's far more complex!

I think I've kind-of understood some bits of Southern Region units; the three-letter classifications are fairly easy to work out if you have a basic understanding of standard coach classifications/have spent a lot of time reading about them

-Peter

 

[reddragon]

I believe that was because originally they had different engines, but when the fleet was homogenised the decision was sensibly taken to merge the classes.



Many foreign rail systems still do this - treat trailers and driving trailers as seperate classes.



The Edinburgh-Glasgow 79xxx never became 126s as such being withdrawn in 1971 except a handful of cars sent to Ayr once the E&G fleet was replaced by loco-haulage. The Ayrshire fleet is what became the Class 126.



Yes!

But I agree the general arrangement is complex and can be confusing without study.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2020 ==


But equally as interesting!

The Southern units have the added excitement of classes and Southern 3 letter codes plus the endless reuse & rebuilding & renumbering. At the end, a Class 415 car was previously a class 405, previously a wooden 4 sub, originally a 3 sub converted from loco haul. Its motors were re-used in class 455s!

 

[hexagon789]

The Southern units have the added excitement of classes and Southern 3 letter codes plus the endless reuse & rebuilding & renumbering. At the end, a Class 415 car was previously a class 405, previously a wooden 4 sub, originally a 3 sub converted from loco haul. Its motors were re-used in class 455s!

The SR was without any doubt king of make-do-and-mend, recycling and interoperability.

The 206 "Tadpoles" and successor 204s are good examples of all 3 of those things.

 

[reddragon]

17th is new DMU day!

1st is my Lima class 156. I bought this a few weeks ago. Not the greatest model on earth, but OK. The reason I bought it was it is fitted with an ESU sound chip for a price not much above a 2nd hand Lima 156 price. The sound sounds really good, top notch however, it doesn't time with the Lima model at all. My plan is when I get a decent modern DMU I can switch the ESU into that and put a basic chip in this or sell it as DC.

As you see the body is good but the underframes are basic.



Next is my Bachmann 170. A really nice model, but the DCC conversion is costly requiring professional expertise and a total rewire of the power & dummy cars and of course 2 chips! The conversion work cost more than I paid for the train! Ouch!!

 

[hexagon789]

As you see the body is good but the underframes are basic.

I remember a review of the model when new pointing out the "blocky" underframe detail and it rather put me off. I've since obtained a new model which is much more detailed below the sole bar though the livery is wrong but it was a good price!

Next is my Bachmann 170. A really nice model, but the DCC conversion is costly requiring professional expertise and a total rewire of the power & dummy cars and of course 2 chips! The conversion work cost more than I paid for the train! Ouch!!

That is unfortunate, but often seems to be the case sadly.

 

[reddragon]

The 18th goes to my most expensive DCC conversion requiring 3 chips and lots of rewiring! It cost twice as much to convert as it did to buy, so be warned!!

The Bachmann class 220 is a really nice unit, runs well, dir lights etc so just about worth the effort as I already owned it. I will never buy another Bachmann that isn't DCC ready.

 

[Cowley]

Nice. Seven days of advent to go now so I’m wondering what’ll be next...

 

[reddragon]

Nice. Seven days of advent to go now so I’m wondering what’ll be next...

I am expecting an addition for the 25th so that will be my last one.