Jump to content

bill badger

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

73 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Location
    near Clitheroe, Lancashire
  1. Slow progress as I've been away a lot with work; did manage to spend a couple of evenings in my hotel room, sitting with a pint and putting chairs into the sleeper bases in the Finetrax kits. Back at home, I've got some cork down, transferred the track plan with carbon paper and, this last week, got some track down. This front point and the track is the reference for getting all the rest in the right place. I'm not using fishplates and am using scale 60ft panels, if only because this is the length that is easily produced using the Finetrax jig; I tried making a longer length but with the code 40, the already slotted sleepers move as the track is pushed and it all ends up too wonky. The Finetrax point kits are excellent; fiddly as you might expect, given their size, but excellent. This point and the approach track are now glued and have gone down nice and straight using Tracksettas. I have also been able to fix a Cobalt under the board (the two obvious dropper wires are like that so they clear the casing) and that works really well with the Finetrax tiebar. A pushed wagon runs through nice and smoothly; there may be a couple of tweaks needed but all seems good. Next target is the rest of the 'front line' so I can wire up and test with a loco.
  2. I don't understand the Farish approach. The release schedule seems completely scattergun; there doesn't seem to be any coordination which would surely drive sales and nuture the market.
  3. Pasted too much of the code from Flickr - that should have it now?
  4. Managed to get some time over the last couple of weeks to finish preparing the baseboard (varnish 'out' and grey primer / undercoat 'in') and get the first track laid. Finished gluing last night and wired up today. Tested tonight and all seems fine. The track is the new(ish) concrete sleeper / flat bottom rail flexi from Finetrax, forming the 'backdrop' through line (i.e. the Down Slow where it runs away from the fast lines to link to Northcote Junction, depot and goods yard - in my mind anyway). I'm very impressed with the track. Given that its Code 40 with flexible sleeper base units, it took a lot of tweaking with a metal rule to get it down smooth and straight(ish). There are a couple of small wobbles, but they aren't visible from side on and from the end they look no worse than you would see in a photo of prototype BR track. I've posted a comparison shot with a length of Peco Streamline (granted with wooden sleepers); let's just say I'd never consider using the Peco track again.
  5. Decided to go with a single signal covering normal running from right to left and forget the reversible or bi-directional idea. Think it would add interest to include direction feathers to indicate a junction beyond.
  6. Odd - doesn't look like they have been 'exported' by Anyrail. Thanks for everyone's responses; I appreciate the slightly 'woolly' nature of the scenario and take on board the comments. The concept is to provide as much interest as possible within a limited space, within my brief to create a partial view of 1980s TMD in N gauge. I thought it would increase interest to include the means for slowing / stopping passing trains and for movements across the back to then appear 'on depot'. The rear line is best conceived as a loop, avoiding line (as per Crewe) or even a 'slow' running line in a main line system. Depot access is some way to the left, and the main bulk of the TMD extends to the right. I daresay there would be a yard in proximity. Whilst I acknowledge comments about the need for signals and the 'reality' of the undertaking, surely everything we try to do in the modelling world is all about feel and interpretation? If we modelled to 100% real life accuracy our layout would generally be very dull watching indeed. Hence my query about the theory of signalling a bi-directional stretch of busy line; I think I can now plan accordingly.
  7. Thanks for the replies. As requested, here's my plan (thread linked in signature). Signals as 'plonked' in Anyrail are just for show. I'm after feel of a prototype that might be reasonable. The rear line is included almost as part of the backscene, so I can place (& run when set up with enough space) 'mainline' trains. The whole layout is intended to be a limited view of much wider local infrastructure - a TMD alongside a mainline. The thinking was to represent some sort of avoiding line (crewe hole style), part of the mainline system with further lines beyond. This line would leading to the (off scene) depot entrance / yards etc. Granted 4 aspect & full bi-directional might be pushing it.
  8. Been trying to google may way through this query, but not having much joy. I'm looking to place signals along a stretch of single track, envisaged to be part of a wider mainline junction / depot access arrangement, acting as an avoiding or link line that could be used in both directions. Admittedly, this is a bit of a construct to allow me to run trains in either direction along a single line located at the back of a TMD layout. The layout is set in the 1980s / early 90s. I want to place two colour aspect signals (4 aspect for a mainline system), one for each direction, on the basis the line is fully bidirectional. Would it be normal for signals to be paired and located immediately adjacent, or can they be offset? Could someone also recommend a book / link that will give me a steer on where lineside equipment (boxes etc.) would typically be located in relation to signals. Thanks.
  9. Baseboard My flat-pack baseboard from Tim Horn was delivered last week and I took advantage of being confined to barracks with man-flu to build it up over the weekend. I am very impressed by the quality. I’ll be leaving the front and top pieces off for now for ease of access. I also need some legs! I am mulling over what to do at the front right corner; I wanted a through line here, leading to the implied larger maintenance shed area beyond, but will need to be clever about hiding the hole.
  10. I think the right hand side will be quite well covered but the left hand side will need some more work. The 'hiding in plain sight' approach might be the first port of call and we'll go from there. There is, after all, no rush...
  11. Thanks for the info - that would explain some of the photos I've seen. One of the things that can help to mark out excellent layouts, from otherwise very good ones, if the way they fit into their surroundings and how cuttings, embankments, natural slopes and outcrop are represented is crucial in this. Sadly there's not much space for deep cuttings, sweeping slopes or crags on this layout...
  12. What a fantastic layout; definitely something to aspire to. I love the way that all the colours in the scenery and the weathering are all from the same palete. I will have a good browse on flickr when I get a moment.
  13. With the arrival of my order from finetrax this morning, I thought it would be good to get the whole plan printed so I could trial the position of the card structures I bashed up so far (I was playing with diesel tanks yesterday) and get a feel for sight lines. I have tweaked the track plan slightly, to allow positioning of the tanks and pumphouse; the second line leading off scene to the left has now become a siding. Now trying to come up with ideas for the building at the left-hand side; it’s intended to add to the view blocker for the running line’s exit off stage. I think I might model the rear of an older brick shed building, now being used as a workshop, perhaps with a single through line (albeit immediately truncated beyond the door, in the style of Knottingley).
  14. A couple of hours today tweaking the mock up for the maintenance shed. The side shed is now wider than it is taller and is more in keeping with the prototype. Have widened the main shed by a few mm and I think it looks better too.
  • Create New...