Wenlock's Blog

Good grief! That was quick.

 

The double slip looks a bit sharp/tight, but only in some of the pictures.

The A5 left (not something the GWR had!) will be a rather tight curve, and could look so. How about a B6 left, but on a slight right-hand curve, with a slight movement of the loco shed?

 

Edit: love the double-arched bridge, by the way!

This will be exquisite, Dave.

Really love that fiddle yard idea - haven't seen anything like that before - very original. I'm assuming that the scenic area is 8 ft and that its 00 not N?

Hi Dave,

 

I'm no expert but this has the makings of something special.

 

I love the presentation and the overall effect this mock up has achieved and look forwards to seeing the real thing in the making.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

Good grief! That was quick.

 

The double slip looks a bit sharp/tight, but only in some of the pictures.

The A5 left (not something the GWR had!) will be a rather tight curve, and could look so. How about a B6 left, but on a slight right-hand curve, with a slight movement of the loco shed?

 

Edit: love the double-arched bridge, by the way!

Hi Simon,

Yes I was off the starting blocks a bit sharpish! amazing what a bit of inspiration and day off work can do!

The double slip is a 1 in 6, which i'm hoping will be ok. The biggest loco's I'm planning on running are probably going to be Dean or Armstrong goods, I think anything much bigger than an 0-6-0 tender loco would look out of place.

 

I was a bit concerned about the A5 and your suggestion of a curved B6 is something I hadn't thought of. Watch this space for a revision on the plan!

 

Glad you like the double arch bridge, I thought it would hide the entrance to the fiddle yard better than a double span, I just need to find a prototype picture of something suitable!

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

This will be exquisite, Dave.

Thanks Al!

Really love that fiddle yard idea - haven't seen anything like that before - very original. I'm assuming that the scenic area is 8 ft and that its 00 not N?

Hi PaternosterRow, the layout is going to be in O gauge 7mm scale. The scenic area works out at around 12 feet, with a further 4 foot 6 inches for the fiddle yard on the left of the plan. There is also going to be a small off stage hidden road on the right hand side of the plan, that will act as an off stage feed for the private siding. This should give a total length of around 18 feet.

 

Dave

Hi Dave,

 

I'm no expert but this has the makings of something special.

 

I love the presentation and the overall effect this mock up has achieved and look forwards to seeing the real thing in the making.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

Thanks Mark, glad you liked it!

 

Dave

Very good! The tree helps disguise the hole in the sky very well. Remember that private sidings were invariably gated; a short run of fencing either side with an (operable) gate that swings back towards the loco shed would add to the ruse.

 

+1 for the double arch bridge. It works as an excellent view block to the fiddle yard on layouts like Llanastr and

. (time index 1.38 shows this perfectly).

This has all the makings as something great and one to watch... proper thought out backscene - hurrah!

I've no idea how big this mock-up is, but you could sell it as a ready to lay track T or Z gauge layout once you've built the pukka 0 gauge layout (I'm not being serious, but....)

This has all the makings as something great and one to watch... proper thought out backscene - hurrah!

I've no idea how big this mock-up is, but you could sell it as a ready to lay track T or Z gauge layout once you've built the pukka 0 gauge layout (I'm not being serious, but....)

hi Chris,

Yes I'm also a bit "funny" about back scenes! I've seen so many otherwise great layouts spoiled by "corners in the sky", gaping cracks in the sky, or even worse IMHO, operator's belly in the sky! I'm going to do my best to avoid all three issues if I can, however with a 12 foot scenic section the crack in the sky may be a problem! Hopefully a strategically placed tree will help mask the issue.

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

+1 for the double arch bridge. It works as an excellent view block to the fiddle yard on layouts like Llanastr and

. (time index 1.38 shows this perfectly).

Both favorite layouts of mine! My mate Marc has recently bought Ruyton Road, a really inspirational little layout, that more than makes up for it's size with brilliant well observed modelling.

I think that Adrian (Buckjumper) has commented this way before and I hope that you do not mind my coming back on the question. The images here give the length and say little about the width.... a visual reckoning is around 4'6" or so. From work which Adrian and I have been doing in regard to a model we have concluded that a maximum width of 4'3" - 4'6" is workable for 7mm provided that there is no need to access three-link couplings at the front when operating from the back. You may wish to set out a 12" to 1' scale model in regard to track positions from front to back and include any backscene so as to check on this concern.

 

regards, Graham

I think that Adrian (Buckjumper) has commented this way before and I hope that you do not mind my coming back on the question. The images here give the length and say little about the width.... a visual reckoning is around 4'6" or so. From work which Adrian and I have been doing in regard to a model we have concluded that a maximum width of 4'3" - 4'6" is workable for 7mm provided that there is no need to access three-link couplings at the front when operating from the back. You may wish to set out a 12" to 1' scale model in regard to track positions from front to back and include any backscene so as to check on this concern.

 

regards, Graham

Hi Graham, thanks for your comments regarding baseboard depth. Your conclusion of around 4' 6" as being a desirable maximum sounds about right to me as well. I like the idea of the railway being set in a reasonable chunk of countryside, so want the depth as deep as is practically possible. I've seen numerous layouts at shows, where regardless of the scale or length of the layout, the baseboards are always 2 feet deep. I think that the relationship between the length and width of a layout has a big influence on the aesthetic appeal of the finished article.

 

The next step in the project is to buy some lining paper and as you suggest, set the track plan and baseboard dimensions to full size. Hopefully once this has been done I'll get a better idea of critical dimensions. Luckily I'm 6' 4" inches tall and blessed with very long arms, so the depth problem may be minimised!

 

A related issue is one of baseboard length. The scenic part of the proposed layout is 12' 6" and the track plan lends itself into being split into two equal boards each 6' 3" long, which avoids a baseboard joint running through any points.

 

The alternative would be to split the layout into 3 boards, around 4 feet long. This would be more managable, but would mean baseboard joints crossing through points, which I would like to try to avoid.

 

If the layout turns out well, I'd like to be able to exhibit it occasionally. So although not exactly portable, I would at least like it to be transportable!

 

I'd appreciate thoughts/views on this baseboard length issue.

 

Thanks for your interest once again.

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

A baseboard 6'3" long by 4'6" is going to be like moving a double bed without taking it apart, and I've yet to see a bed that doesn't separate for transportation purposes. 3 nearer square baseboards, plus the train turntable, seems like a more manageable solution to me. You could have the 4 parts pair up with display sides facing inwards to protect them.

A baseboard 6'3" long by 4'6" is going to be like moving a double bed without taking it apart, and I've yet to see a bed that doesn't separate for transportation purposes. 3 nearer square baseboards, plus the train turntable, seems like a more manageable solution to me. You could have the 4 parts pair up with display sides facing inwards to protect them.

Yes, I guess you're right! I'm just trying to avoid baseboard joints. I like the idea of baseboards paired up facing each other, that should really help during transportation.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

Having seen Wenlocks' modelling in the past,

I can only say this is going to be superb...

But they are going to be BIG baseboards Dave!

 

Hope to see you in the gym this week

Hi Marc, you're not wrong about the big baseboard thing! I'm going to need help carting the layout about, I'm counting on you matey!

This looks superb Dave - I will be watching this like a thing that watches something.

 

Humbly yours

Roger

Thanks Roger! I'm hoping the very lovely Myvanwy is impressed!

 

Dave

She's stoney faced as always - must be all the trundling around and falling off the wagon..

Cissie Braithwaite and Ada Shufflebotham meanwhile, continue to adjust their bosoms.

 

Roger

Cissie Braithwaite and Ada Shufflebotham meanwhile, continue to adjust their bosoms.

 

Both fine upstanding members of the parish I'm sure!

 

Dave

I feel the hump in the overbridge is too much. It might be an idea to reduce the vertical radius, or even continue the gradient of the road slightly toward the front as it disappears into the screen.

I feel the hump in the overbridge is too much. It might be an idea to reduce the vertical radius, or even continue the gradient of the road slightly toward the front as it disappears into the screen.

Yes the hump in the bridge probably is a bit too high. If anyone has got a good picture of a prototype twin arch bridge , I'd love to see it. I like your idea of continuing the gradient of the road towards the front of the layout, but would like to keep the twin arches as I think it will help mask the off stage area.

 

Best wishes

 

Dave

Admittedly not over railway tracks, but this twin archer might provide some inspiration: