LNER4479

Interesting. Yes, I seem to have acquired a few chassis only & body only kits along the way; seemed to be a feature of the range. That 4F is body only; I'd probably use a Comet chassis if I were to make it, adding suitable detail to the body until I was (reasonably) happy with it. But not just yet awhile!

Latest update, actually a combination of two recent visits. We're now at the (exciting) stage whereby the boards for Doncaster station itself need constructing. This eight foot board should support the south end junctions and southern half of the station. One suitably braced (honest), top board is fastened down. The view the other way shows how the shape and layout of the fiddle yard tracks are designed to match the orientation of the station boards so as to maintain the access space to be a reasonably credible 2ft 6" min. See track plan in post #1. Attention then switched to further tracklaying in the fiddle yard area. And here we are at 'draw stumps'. The fiddle yard beginning to take shape and pretty much 'as planned'. For now at least.

Evening Tony, Here's my only Jamieson kit build to date: No idea whether this was a standard or special kit. I do seem to recall the coupling rods being lengths of rail with holes drilled in them. I added bosses either side to improve the looks. This was 20 years ago. Not too shabby? Meanwhile, I have a few in stock, thanks to our recent work. One of the earlier ones with a picture stuck on the box. So what would you expect to find inside a box with a (lovely) picture of an A3-hauled ECML express on the cover? Why - a LMS 4F goods loco, of course 😆 One day, I might have a crack at it, just for the hell of it ... Finally (for now), did someone say that Jamieson didn't do BR standards? Was this a 'special', therefore? (body only) Available to anyone interested at a very reasonable price!

'That photo is taken from Nelson bridge which is the continuation of Victoria viaduct at the north end of Citadel, the bridge also goes across the river here. We have a low relief version of that goods shed alongside a line which just disappears into the wall - we just have the through goods lines, no room for Dentonholme yard (the building wasn't big enough....).' Thanks Mike. In the fullness of time, a bridge on the layout at that point might be quite appropriate and will make some use of the triangle area. No buses allowed, though (Clive please note)

Thanks Mike. I am aware - propped up against the shoebox is a picture of that end of the shed (quite a popular viewpoint - is there a bridge at that point?) and I fully intend to have the nearest road running through as you describe and try and make something of that scene. Last night was just a rough plonk down of some lengths of tracks, principally focused on the configuration of pointwork I require.

Ooh - nearly forgot. It's not escaped my notice that the subject of this thread has been nominated in the 2023 awards, so thanks to those who nominated it for the shortlist. It's only a bit of fun but feel free to click on the BRMA 2023 awards banner if you feel so moved 🤩

So, with the grey paint finally dry (24hrs in a cold chapel), here's what's going on: Dentonholme yard includes a Goods Depot area. That's the furthest away of the new boards and it's on the level, as befits a depot, where wagons will be stabled. Meanwhile, in the foreground, the running lines drop down away from the yard towards Bog Junc. I decided to end the cork in the Goods Depot as shown, leaving a funny little triangle shape. No need to fill every square inch with track? Here's a likely track plan for the south end, based - as ever - on the prototype. The two locos are on what might be described as the yard through road. Behind them are the transfer sidings, where the trip workings will be handled. In front are the through lines - although, being goods lines, trains can be held here and shunted as necessary. Behind are the roads of the Goods Depot fanning out. The shoe box marks where the goods shed will be. Two roads inside with a central loading area. Bit of a Peco order needed methinks ...

With so much to do, there's always something different to be done to keep the variety and interest going. This, for example. A gap that's needed filling for the last six months, this is the continuation of the goods lines from Bog Junc (top left) into Dentonholme yard (bottom right). A 6' x 2' piece of 9mm recently procured has been suitable marked, cut and just placed in position for now. As you can see, there's two parts to it. I'll come back to that. Boards removed and structure being installed. Leg added, boards fixed for keeps and corked. And now with cork painted. This view taken specifically to show the new boards in relation to the other recent work. In the background is Upperby. The goods lines then follow the recently installed curve top left, through Bog Junc. and towards the camera to link up with the already constructed northern end of Dentonholme Goods Yard. In some ways, it's a bit of a significant moment or at least a milestone - I now have the complete trackbed for the out and back route of a goods train via the WCML. As well, almost inadvertently (as it wasn't planned), a complete circuit into the bargain. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. There's track needing laying and then getting it all wired up is going to slow me down a little ... (Part 2 to follow - run out of space to upload any more photos on this post)

Everything on the signalbox diagram will be motored and interlocked with signals etc. I was talking about shunting points only, outside the signalled area.

Another day, another set of points to install ... Actually, there's 3 evenings' work on show here. Cut (and curve) track to length; paint (spray); mark and cut square holes; install motors / switches; solder on wires (much easier than upside-down soldering). And now the 'phew' moment. Focus for this work has been the 3-way (tandem) point which appeared recently. The two other leads off the point lead into the goods yard; the Y-point behind is the depot entrance point. A quick 'push through' with these three coaches gives initial confidence that all should be OK in terms of alignment, following the gentle tweaking. Beginning to look the part? This shows the sort of double track arrangement beyond the actual junctions. Top right is the depot EXIT point - also the way in / out of the carriage shed - the succession of crossovers heading towards the camera ensure light locos / stock moves gain the correct running line heading for the station. Not quite 'job done' but all remaining pointwork is of the more straightforward shunting type. Questionable whether any of the closer-to-hand ones even need point motors for a home layout?

Been reading the recent posts re RTR vs kit / scratchbuild. I've recently taken on the challenge of completing a scratchbuild that I started some 35 years ago (I'm sure there'll be others who have even longer running projects waiting patiently on their workbench). It'll be my only second ever full scratchbuild. It's a Fairburn tank. When I started it, 35 years ago, no such RTR offering was available ... ... but now? I could have - in fact I DO have - the Bachmann offering. So why bother with all this effort, now? I must be totally doolally, within everything else I have to do on my insane layout project ... Because I like making things, that's why! Right from the word go, I took to 'making things' without any particular encouragement. Lego, Meccano, Airfix kits when I was younger and then later on I found I could solder things. Nobody showed me (can't you tell?), I just had a go and worked out my own way of doing it. It's why I don't fear for the future of the hobby. There'll always be a sector within the hobby that like making things. In fact, even if folks are using RTR in putting together a layout, so what? - they're still making a layout. There's plenty who find the baseboard / tracklaying / electrics side of layout construction hard-going ... but once they get to the scenic side of things, they come to life and often create amazing effects and scenes. The sort of stuff that I conversely struggle with (particularly the use of paint, colour, tone, light n shade, etc), not part of my skill set at all. I also don't subscribe to the view that everyone used to make things in the past 'because they had to'. The pages of RM in the 1960s and 70s had plenty of layouts cheerfully using the HD and Triang RTR items of the day. Other locos may have been a bodyline kit mounted on a standard RTR chassis - my Dad had quite a few of those, using the HD R1 0-6-0 chassis. He paid a professional modeller to do the work for him. Ironically, it's only in more recent times that he's 'had a go' himself, gluing together (never soldering!) such a kit and mounting it on a current RTR 'Jinty' chassis. A straw poll of one, I accept, but ... well ... for what it's worth. The hobby's alive n well, so far as I'm concerned.

Meanwhile, how's 'e getting on with that Fairburn tank? C'mon, admit it - you forgot all about it, didn't you? 🥴 Well, anyway ... frames and driving wheels have been painted and wheels fitted, hopefully for keeps. There was a bit more involved than what might appear here, as there was a tight spot, which I eventually traced to a coupling rod bearing hole not being quite where it should be (despite having used the coupling rods as template for drilling wheel centres, Guy Williams style). Hole gingerly elongated, sliver of brass soldered in and hole re- drilled ... Success! Now perfectly free running. Took a bit of time but worth the effort, methinks? Whilst I was on the chassis, treated myself to some valve gear work. Some of this uses the MRJ LMS Stainless steel etch. Duly assembled. Radius rods set in forward gear; I like to see it all moving 🤗 Recent evenings have seen work switch to superstructure. First horror moment was the realisation that I hadn't built in the tapers to the rear bunker sides when I originally put this together, 35 years ago. Decided that I couldn't live with it so I cut down the fold, cleaned up and re-soldered, one side at a time. That's better. With the mod. done, I can now solder in the missing bunker top pieces, which of course maintain the same taper angle, so it's not all simple 90 degree work. That's looking better! As of 'knocking off' at 1am this morning(!) Spotted that the inset for the footstep is actually checker plate which I knew I had a little bit of in the scrap box. Otherwise, the more I work on the loco, the more I realise how relatively 'green' I was all them years ago. It ain't ever going to win any prizes (other than a sympathy vote!) but it'll be good to get it finished at long last 🙂

That (the B7 on Knutsford East Junction - one of the original 18.83 challenge layouts) was the work of the late Dick Petter. The one and only time I visited Roy Jackson at Retford, he showed me his half built B7, cursing at the insanely small size of some of the valve gear components, scaled down from 7mm. At the risk of blatant advertising (which it's not meant to be in this context), a 4mm etch for the GC self-trimming tender is available through G-Train, being the ultimate fruition of an aborted project to produce one in the Great Central models range. One of the features I believed was distinctive was the shape of the FRONT coal plate top, having a noticeably lower centre section compared to the gentle upwards arch of the standard 4000 gall version. Usually noticeable on three-quarter shots of locos, once you know to look for it.

Not yet, but I hope to tackle some soon. I'm not expecting it to be fundamentally different.

It's exaggerated (taken on 2x telephoto). That's the point blade. I can induce a slight curve into it if needed but don't think it'll be be necessary - it's not like it's fine scale or anything (!)

Yes - that's inevitable. However, the Code 75 3-way is a vastly superior item compared to its Code 100 equivalent - in fact, before someone else corrects me, it's not actually a 3-way per se; it's more correctly described as a tandem point. In Peco terms, it's a left hand and right hand medium radius point interlaced. I work on the basis of a med radius point being about 3.5ft, meaning that what I have done above steepens the left hand curve to about 3ft? Shouldn't cause a problem. The primary purpose of what I've done here is to induce a shallow curve into the 'straight ahead' route, in order to maintain alignment at that part of the Upperby curve (approx 9ft at that point). What happens to the other radii is a consequence, not the driver. It'll make more sense once you see it in position.

This is more interesting ... Curving a Code75 3-way point. Actually quite easy. Peco have thoughtfully already provided a series of gaps in the webbing underneath so it's easy to induce a (gentle!) curve there. Just needs a few more nicks fore and aft and job done 👍

Nope, you lost me after the 'just two wires' bit ... 😵‍💫

As already spotted by philip-griffiths above, 'tis a jigsaw puzzle, an occasional weakness of mine 🧩

Nah ... go back'ards the other way. Think of all those other lovely Ds, Js, Ks (etc) you could have ...

I'd be sewing 'em back on again if I'd tried to do that ...

Well, first of all there's the minor matter of actually building the layout that it relates to ... I may be gone some time 🤔

Ladies and gentlemen: Looking down on proceedings from its new vantage point, I give you: ... the former track panel indicator board from Carlisle No.5 signalbox STRICTLY speaking, it's the post steam era layout (dated 1969) and actually depicts the current layout (bar one or two minor alterations) ... but why let the facts get in the way. It's close enough. My thanks in particular to @LNERGE of this parish who first made me aware of its potential availability. There's even a cunning plan to fit new bulbs to it ... 😀

Only one item in the van ... But it looks interesting!

There was a delivery last month.