Chris Higgs

Most people just use the Dapol body (both 4500 and 4575 versions available), together with an etched chassis. It is to 1:148 scale rather than 1:152. Very detailed original drawing in Great Western Railway Journal Issue 16. There was also long ago a drawing by Stuart Hine on how he built his scratchbuilt 45XX. He made his own motor which you don't need to do any more. Chris

But do you only want to see layouts the same as yours at an exhibition? I am going to add Portchullin to my list. Saw it at the Utrecht exhibition, just evokes memories of a epic trainspotting to the West of Scotland, out via Fort WIlliam and Mallaig, bus across Skye and back via Kyle of Lochalsh and Inverness. And the loco sound is all part of it. Chris

Hmm, I suspected that on this group we would find an exhibition heavily biased to the ECML, and mostly in steam days. 😀 I think for the dream exhibition we do need to mix it up a bit, in both location and modelling periods. To address Tony's point, I am not that concerned about actual locations. I didn't include any overseas layouts, because I don't know them that well, but American model railroaders do tend to focus on operational interest, which can also make for an incredible layout experience. But I did tend to pick layouts where there has been attention to detail in the stock formations and/or buildings, and that just tell me where they are set, even if that place does not exist. Pendon falls into this category, even though the buildings are from various locations (but what a standard of research and execution!), the end result is an amazing evocation of the Vale of the White Horse in the 1930s. Mostyn does not have that many buildings, but everyone who was spotting in the 1970s knows they are looking at an authentic scene based on the trains. What is that other Keir Hardy layout, the one that screams 'West Riding' at you? Chris

I guess that rules Pendon out, then. As I don't think you can draw up an objective set of criteria, the question cannot be answered. But I could imagine compiling a list of layouts to go in the all-time dream exhibition might be amusing. Here's a few I would include Copenhagen Fields Mostyn Leamington Spa Borchester Market Dewsbury Midland Pendon Buckingham Chris

Ah, I see now. GWR 2-cylinder 4-6-0s have a similar issue. As mentioned by others, this is often addressed by pivoting the bogie somewhere nearer or even over the rear bogie axle. However, only fixing it in the frame as you have done really prevents any lateral movement. Chris

Not the way Tim has built it. Similarly the W1 was often classified as a 4-6-2-2 rather than 4-6-4, as the rear traling wheels formed two independent truacks, rather than a bogie. Chris

Hi Tim, What is the reasoning behind making the loco a 2-2-6-2? Following your advice on 0-4-4s I made my chassis kits so they could (as an option) be built as an 0-4-2-2, which helps a lot with weight balancing issues, but had not thought about it on something more conventional like a 4-6-2. With this arrangement you seem to have a rather long rigid wheelbase. Sorry if I missed this somewhere higher up in the thread. Chris

Sounds like something that could be made as a one off limited run. There are a number of other wheel types that a single batch might be justifiable, but not as a permanently available item. I can also imagine someone of your experience Tim could machine up your own wheels from the 3D printed centres. The size of these prints is pretty small so a very small batch size is possible. There are indeed limits on minimum thickness that can be printed that are higher on these metal materials than can be achieved with plastic. Chris

Hmm, you have given me an idea. I designed three Lowmac kits which are/were available throught the shop. But there was a fourth design for a longer BR type which I couldn't manage to build as it was all just too flexible. I am now thinking a piece of PCB used as an under-floor might just do the trick of stiffening it up. By chance, I am tidying my railway room in preparation for moving house in a few months and I came across a whole box of single-side PCB sheets that I must have bought decades ago. Chris

They will become pliable if placed in hot water. I used it out of the tap, I was not going to see what happened if I used boiling hot. How to restrain them so the bowing does not return is another matter. No liability accepted though if you try this! Might be better to work out if you can find a way to fix a nut in the centre of the roof underside and run a bolt up from the floor to hold them in place. In the particular case of the D50/299 this bolt would be concealed inside the toilets. Chris

I think we have to treat shot-down etches for what they are, and accept they will present some challenges. I have built a number of kits from this range in 4mm, and found them to be simple and easy to build, and value for money. There is no way that 4mm one was 55.00 pounds when they were in production. Perhaps I should dig out my unbuilt ones and flog them off. Chris

Yes, the vacuum cylinder would need to be on this side, it should always be at the opposite end to the DC brakelever on the same side. The wagon also has 3-link couplings, highly unlikely for a (ex-)fitted wagon, which would have Instanters. Chris

Yep, agreed. The GWRJ articles make a clear assumption that spindle buffers makes the wagon a V12, self-contained a V14/16. And that is indeed what is shown on the diagram drawings. Lot numbers (which are orders to build wagons) do not have to be built all of one diagram, as a diagram has a certain meaning to the operating departments. I doubt that the placement of a V hanger would have significance to which diagram a wagon is placed in, it hardly affects the operational characteristics of the wagon, whereas different buffers perhaps would. The V12 diagram drawing shows a central V hanger, even though we can see the majority were offset. Whereas to modellers (well some at least!) it means more changes needed than just switching the buffers. In a different context, Toplight coaches from different lots had variations in the panelling, toilet windows and the like, but were all placed in the same diagram. Chris

Dare we expect these vans and wagons to appear in N/2mm, as the SECR ones are going to? I have an interest as I designed the kit versions that the 2mm Scale Association has sold for many years (resin body and etched underframe). Chris

I think the question was that the V16s were not built vacuum-fitted, perhaps it was fitted later. But the iron roof was not found on V14s, according to John Lewis. Chris

Sorry if this has been mentioned before. The GWRJ article in issue 67 states that the 1912 batches of V14 were residual builds of what were to be V12s. So perhaps they just used up the parts in stock e.g. the offset Vs and the brakegear until they were gone and then switched to the symetrical Vs? Chris

As the Stanier reskinning only took place in 1939-40 I'd be a bit surprised if none of the original coaches received the simplified lining earlier than that. Chris

It's what he said when he apologised to me. He had given me a bit of a black eye and that took some explaining on his part. Chris

Do you have to prove intent? The only time I was hit by one it was an accident, as the teacher had intended it for the boy sitting next to me. He obviously needed to practice more... I seem to recall he had to apologise to my mother. Chris

Yes, it is many a long year since I have seen a Fleischmann Warship. I suspect UK TT120 outline will go the same way as the HO stuff. Although it is not up against an established scale (OO) with masses of RTR this time. Chris

Hmm, 2FS modellers make a great fuss about the track gauge being absolutely correct but accept over-width wheels and splashers. 😉 Chris

12mm track gauge is pretty much bang-on true scale for 1:120. So I am pretty sure you would not need to move the splashers, they will already be plenty wide enough for finer wheels. The only thing you would have to do is adjust the check and wing rail gaps on TT120 points to match. Hmm, that actually makes it easier to do than if modelling in either 2FS or P4. So is TT120 the only (UK) RTR scale where the track gauge is correct? We don't have to move splashers on RTR locos in 2mm for the same reason, both N and 2FS end up with a total width over wheelsets which is wider then prototype, so the splashers have already been set to match this. You could use code 40 rail, but secondary track doesn't really match the loco stock available from Hornby, which seems to just be top-link ECML. Chris

https://Bachmann-spares.co.uk/product/category/1219/class-47-accessory-pack-372-240/f7224-219-01

To compare 2FS to P4 is not really that valid in my view. The equivalent of 2FS in 4mm scale would be EM standards. The tread width you suggest for TT120 would require pretty much scale checkrail gaps, which is not what 2FS has. Our checkrail gaps are 0.5mm, whereas true-to-scale would be about 0.3mm. Pendon use an EM-Fine standard (more or less P4 tyre widths but with EM flanges). Chris

I fear I may have been guilty myself of writing off a layout because it did not constitute what I considered exhibition worthy. There was an N gauge layout at Warley one year, I think from Warley MRS themselves, that was running a series of RTR trains that was not even from the same continent! But it had some impressive high rise buildings. These days I would probably just conclude that if it is drawing a crowd, it can be counted a success for its target audience. After all Warley is a general model railway show, not some Scalefour gathering. Chris