I didn't realise Carrs had any connection to Model Railway Developments?
grovenor-2685 wrote:I didn't realise Carrs had any connection to Model Railway Developments?
Hubert Carr sold his original business to Brian Lewis and, I suppose, got a bit bored with retirement so started up again as MRD.
I think "Carrs" as a business name is still with C&L under the new owner, so should not really be applied to MRD except perhaps as a possessive as it is in the header.
nberrington wrote: I wondered if it was any better than a sprung underframe. My short test bench doesn't seem to discriminate much between compensated and sprung, but the turnouts don't like half-baked-semi-working springing - ie if the axelbox gets stuck in the "up" position, the wagons tilt most alarmingly...
nberrington wrote:Has anyone any experience with this system?
http://www.emardee.org.uk/epages/BT2573 ... ucts/40102
Flymo748 wrote:...However I do have the instructions ....
Will L wrote:Flymo748 wrote:...However I do have the instructions ....
Sorry Paul but i think those are the instruction for this rather different solution
http://www.emardee.org.uk/epages/BT2573 ... ucts/40101
craig_whilding wrote:His coach system is intriguing with the unconstrained swing links.
The current range is based on the concepts of 'swing link' suspension. This is how prototype coaches are mounted on their bogies. It means that the body sways about an axis near the roof, instead of rocking on the top of the bogies. Even on dead flat track there is a need for flexibility in the bogie since the wheels are coned, and any sideways movement will cause one wheel to ride up, and the other down. This means that the likelihood of a derailment is increased for a solid chassis - even on level track. Not only should the bogies have this flexibility, but it is required between the bogies as well. However to achieve this it is important that the bogie pivots permit rotation about the vertical axis but only about this axis.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests