DCB

The NLS (National Library of Scotland) Website has "Georeferenced" maps of the whole of the UK and has pre 1888 and pre 1914 25" to a mile maps for the Teignmouth and Dawlish area. The dates are a bit elastic, butthe earlier one is Broad gauge single track and the later Standard gauge double track. There is no tunnel West of the sea wall at Teignmouth on either. The double track broad gauge ran out along the sea wall and ended at the first tunnel towards Dawlish There was a signal box there just by that first tunnel. I can't find any older maps,

There used to be a book on the Exeter - Newton Abbott line in Swindon Library, which described the tunnels. All the tunnels between Dawlish and Teignmouth are asymmetrical due to being originally broad gauge single track and following the gauge conversion were widened by erecting an internal structure over the standard gauge track and then hacking away at the Sandstone to widen the tunnel, while the trains continued to run. No need for a circular cross section as Red Sandstone a nice material for tunnelling nice and stable bit not too hard. I can't remember what it said about Teignmouth but there is a very very long down platform for arriving tourists still in place, For some reason I spend more time watching trains at Dawlish and Teignmouth (and Aviemore) than I do anywhere within 100 miles of home.

I remember the class 47 "Charles Rennie Mackintosh" the Scotrail livery 47/4 in around 1988 and the blue was damaged showing the red underneath. It literally had a single blue top coat, I always suspected someone had bought a can of non drip gloss from Mc B&Q and slapped it over the red. Overpainting red with light blue in N or 00 is going to be a nightmare, the strip will look really thick by the time you get enough pigment to stop the red showing through. Paint thickness doesn't scale... The bodyside Black is dark grey. I can't remember any Scotrail livery 37/4s back in the 80s/90s the ones I remember and photographed were mainline or large logo

Not sure about this layout. A full track plan would be useful. I would query whether trains can actually run on it as the gradient looks very steep , 1 in 20? the curves very sharp 1st radius? and the tunnel walls look very close to the track . A fair number of 21st century RTR locos can't cope with 1st radius . 1970s Triang will get round sub 1st radius and up a 1 in 10 as required by many of their suggested layouts in the old catalogues My "Bed" layout had to be abandoned as trains could not actually get up the gradients... Even one of the Pecorama layouts seemed to be limited to 3 coaches because of the steep gradients and feeble locos

The E1 were "Local goods and Shunting Engines " according to Brian Haresnape in "Stroudley Locomotives" the coal capacity of 1 Ton 10cwts meant the "Local" was quite literally true. For some reason the the 0-4-2T D1 38 tons and the 0-6-0T E1 was 44 tons in working order with 15T 18 cwt on the rear axle. Yellow in GW speak The SR had 25 surplus E1s for sale in 1925, 10 became E1R 4 to the Isle of Wight and I think 5 were sold to industry, I guess the rest were scrapped, but only needs a tiny change in history for one to have been sold to your own Light Railway company. The E1 with its poor riding and limited range would have been an obvious choice for early withdrawal, GW tanks of the period would run at 50MPH and carried 3 tons of coal by 1925. The SR much preferred 0-6-2T which begs the question why not transfer 0-6-2Ts and replace them on shunting with E1s?

I wouldn't bother, They hide the trains, make access difficult, I would just build the gardens. Was the terrace on the same level as the tracks? Few were. The angle not following the tracks is good, terraces did exist parallel to tracks but very many more were at an angle and almost none were the same level. An inch or so above or below datum would bring it to life, especially if either terrace or tracks were on a gradient, Houses were ether there before the railway or fitted in afterwards and tended to be built straight . Streets there before railways make the more interesting models...

The North Devon & Cornwall Junction Railway, The N D & C was originally narrow gauge and needed extensive repair circa 1925, It was converted to Standard Gauge as part of the upgrade. The SR had no suitable locos and the most modern six coupled tank locos were the PDSWJ 0-6-2Ts apparently the cost for some more new ones was a bit eye opening and with electrification releasing surplus steam locos and new N class moguls available from Woolwich at knock down prices , probably less than an 0-6-2T it was decided that E1 class 0-6-0Ts could be made available for rebuilding as 0-6-2 Tanks using N class pony truck components from Woolwich to make them suitable for Light Railway use. Obviously what they needed was a GWR 2021 class pannier, 3 ton plus coal capacity, dynamically balanced wheels 50mph plus capable, but they used a shunter which was OK up to 25 or so but only held about 1 ton of coal. The later E2 "Thomas" only held 1 ton so assume the E1 was similar. So E1s arrived for Clay and goods workings between Halwill jct and Torrington where the N D & C joined the LSWR Main line end on. All was perfect until the N's came and Ilfacombe became the destination of the main portion of the Waterloo trains as N's could get 6 coaches up the Banks and Torrington the destination of a Through portion, previously the main portion was to Torrington with Exmouth Jct power and the Ilfracombe section taken by a Barnstaple loco. E1Rs thus found themselves working expresses and they were extremely uncomfortable at speed. The 460 class were retained and took over through passenger workings to Barnstaple while a further batch of E1Rs were cobbled up with balanced, that would be dynamically balanced wheels suitable for express speeds of over 30 mph. Somewhere along the history Torrington lost its turntable which would have turned 460 class and presumably T9, K10 etc and Ilfracombe gained a 70 (?) footer which later turned WC and Bob classes I don't know if the earlier E1Rs ever had their balance weights changed but some found work as bankers from Exeter St Davids (GWR) to central about 1 in 35 or about twice as steep as Beattock or Shap While I'm waffling for many years the sole PSWJ 0-6-0T and the Meldon Quarry G6 were the only SR 0-6-0Ts west of Exeter and Exeter kept one tank latterly a Z for freight shunting in the Exeter area. Until Barnstaple got its gronk there were no shunting engines on the withered arm, N and M7 doing most shunting in BR days after the cull of the small 4-4-0s circa 1948/51. Absolutely the antithesis of the GWR who were 0-6-0PT mad. The ND&C was a 25 mph limited light railway bit according to various railway mans' reminiscences the Ivatt and BR 2-6-2T s went very much faster than 25 mph on the passengers between Torrington and Hawlill jct

Unpowered tender, non powered tender maybe, an engine powered tender sounds like one with a motor. That is an Airfix Chassis. No motor, long weight, two pick up strips, push in crank pins. The connecting wires to the tender have broken off, they have spades which plug in to slots in the tender. The chassis is rubbish as the contacts drag and make the wheels stop while the loco is running. I cured mine, took the pick ups of, shorted the tyres to axle one side and fitted brass axle bushes connected to a wire providing one side pick up. Using a Hornby County 4-4-0 tender which also has one side pick up it runs beautifully, shame the tender does not. The Body is, probably Airfix, might be Dapol but the chimney looks like a replacement as it looks central on the smoke box whereas the rear hole should be central. my Airfix body has a similar chimney in the same wrong place fitted by myself 45 years ago. I think the cab steps are missing; Airfix were non powered with stepped side tenders, Dapol loco drive with spur gear drive pancake motors Flat side tenders, Early Hornby like Dapol, then re engineered with a Worm drive can motor. Decent model came out around 2012 with metal valve gear. To complete the saga Hornby Dublo Castle came out around 1957, very good model, Die cast body, X04 like motor. In circa 1961 they ruined it with a cab full of Ring Field motor, it became GR Wrenn, circa 1967 discontinued 1990s(?) Last ones the chassis moulds were worm out, poor quality. Best ones 1957 Hornby (But need bogie wheels upgrading) and 2012 on Hornby. Tenders, Only the Airfix tenders couple to the Airfix chassis, Mine had an Airfix Royal Scot tender chassis and modified straight side tender body. The Airfix tender drive is awful, I later fitted a Hornby tender but the coupling is completely different and needs substantial bodgery, to make it work.

I think something similar happened on the Gloucester Bristol Line at Haresfield (?)as described in Red for Danger,

I think the K&ESR 0-8-0T was bought to operate heavy goods on an extension which was never built, the SR swapped a saddle Tank and spare boiler for it I understand. Tender engines had a bit of a drawback in that they really needed turning at journeys end and turntables not common on light railways. Conversely they were ideal as they could be kept in steam for hours without running out of water while the crew jacked and heaved them back on after a derailment, where a tank would have had its fire thrown out to avoid dropping a plug. There were not many suitable locos available new in the 1895-1905 Light Railway Mania era, and fewer second hand, Railways were scrapping small large wheeled tender locos out classed by heavier stock, too feeble for goods or shunting while redeploying, often rebuilding small goods locos for shunting, which was a popular and entirely wasteful revenue wise UK fetish. Without wasting effort on having bespoke designs drawn up the standard shunting locos from Beyer peacock, Manning Wardle et al were the obvious choices, The light and otherwise suitable colonial export designs tended to be out of gauge, too high and wide, but there were surplus suburban locos available for sale down south, Brighton Terriers and Adams 4-4-2Ts were snapped up, the MSWJR tried to get rid of a couple of its 0-6-0Ts and I believe a couple of 2-4-0Ts but no on was daft enough. . Some LSWR Ilfracombe Goods were also used by light railways but this was later I believe. Railway companies were not allowed to build new for other organisations but could sell second hand surplus stock. So it was not what was wanted but what was available at an affordable price, they wanted a BMW 320i and got a Ford focus 1.0 Egotech. to use a motoring analogy, then again traffic levels hovered around 20% of estimates so no new stock was generally required to cover additional services and once Col Stephens was in charge he was able to swap locos around when the supply of bodgable motive power on one railway ran out while another had a surplus power. For a modeller we are stuck with basically Terriers maybe Hornby Pecketts, and not much else even if going freelance really it only adds the Adams Radial. I have a horrible feeling if the Isle of Skye line which I hope to model had been built it would have inherited HR 2-4-0 or 4-4-0 tender loco from across the way at Kyle which were being withdrawn around 1895/9 and scratch building them is beyond me.

My shortened Dapol (One Bay chopped out so 65 feet ish) has pin on each rail on the left as you look at it which rubs one of two horizontal curved sprung wipers which each cover 160 degrees travel one connected to black feed and one to white feed. It also has notches for indexing It goes dead at mid point but automatically reverses polarity as it is swung. It is still awaiting a motor but hey it was only temporary measure 39 years ago.

Nothing wrong with two loops and trains running in opposite directions, two running the same direction is more fun, formula 0-4-0 racing with Hornby starter set locos, great fun. Picking carriages up and taking them places is a bit ambitious, with UK RTR couplings it means uncoupling at uncoupling ramps on straight track and not being able to couple up again on the ramp. Go back 40 years and with simple modifications you could have multiple electro magnets and uncouple at multiple locations and couple back up at the same places, now you need Kadees which are plug and play on most 2020 era stuff but hacksaw and superglue on 1950- 2010 era Basically shunting short sidings just is not practical with modern RTR, unless you are happy to do it by hand. I would mirror image the plan complete the inner circle a a shunting line and probably not bother with half the sidings. That way tree trains can circulate an a fast over take a slow one, always good to watch. DC cab or DCC, DC cab control needs logic and complicated switching, but makes fault finding simple, DCC is very simple two wires, except some people end up with several hundred droppers soldered to the two wires and everything stops when there is a fault not just one loop

Looking for a bit of confirmation here. Double track main line, Station with short 300 foot platforms and Up goods dead end lay bye requiring train to draw past signal box and into Up platform before setting back. Station has Home and lay bye starter side by side 50 yards North of the Signal Box . Some 400 yards South, Up the line (in advance) is the Up Starter. There is an outer home signal 400 yards North of the Up Home Signal. So Goods has passed the Box. Signalman has seen tail lamp, given train out of section etc to box in the rear and conveyed to driver he should set back into Lay bye. Can Signalman accept express passenger. He has 1/4 mile clear beyond Outer home.? Goods has reversed into lay Bye. Up "Fast" goods has entered station and stopped for water with tail of train 100 yards North of Signal box and within 1/4 mile of the outer home, can signalman accept another train, if so would that be under section clear but station blocked "Warning" arrangements, which I think involves the following train to be checked and crew advised that the station is blocked? Is that right. Are my signals labelled correctly? Just trying to get my head round this. TYPO Should be 440 yards not 400.

It's not clear if the narrowing is flexi track or set track. Both tend to suffer narrowing if the curve radius is reduced, most people don't bend set track but I do. but both get narrower, not much but its exactly what you don't want as gauge widening is fairly common as a way to get trains, full size ones around sharp curves. The narrowing is worse if the ties between sleepers are left as standard, with 3 sleepers tied then a gap, staggered so the gaps alternate between inner and outer rails . I ensure only pairs of sleepers are left connected when fairly sharp curves are involved and I cut all the ties when they get really sharp, and I have gone down to 12" radius in OO streamline on my latest layout. That makes keeping sleepers absolutely at right angles to the rails essential. Any kink will also lead to tight spots . I suppose one could sever the sleepers ease them apart 1mm or so and glue it all back in place but relaying seems the easy option.

Lima 00 stock is unusual in using H0 underframes and axles. Not a huge issue unless you want to re wheel to EM or P4 where the underframe is very marginal for width for wheel clearance and pretty much under scale. Re wheeling for 00 is not too complicated, 00 axles are too long. So pull the wheels off. Chop the surplus length off with your Dads pliers, stick the axle in a power drill and rub it against a flat file until you get a nice pin point. I doesn't have to be exactly right, only to the nearest half mill, then pop the wheels back, set the back to back with a suitable gauge, mine is a Jengo brick and bobs your mother's brother. Unless you have used fineish scale wheels on a 4 wheel CCT and have curves on gradients. Then it will need some flexibility. I did consider fancy etched rocking 3 point suspension but they rocked excessively and jt was difficult to keep live wheels away from the etching. Then Yer eaker. I had a wheelset with no pinpoints and a pin from an old 3 pin 240 volt plug. I drilled the pin using a Dremel in a drill press to take the axle, Sawed it off just below the hole and using the screw which usually holds the wire I screwed it to the chassis. And it works. There is minimal sideplay as the wheel and axle stubs hit the sides of the W irons etc rollability is similar and there is just enough slop to run faultlessly around my inclined curves which they could not cope with as standard. Buffer height is up with larger wheels but matches Hornby now It has since had a blast of rattle can black but I did the photos first for clarity.

Most of these cast kits were made to fit readily available chassis, the usual one was the generic Triang 0-6-0 chassis from the Saddle Tank, Diesel Shunter etc. Known as the Jinty Chassis the chassis is 8ft + 8ft 3" wheelbase ( 32 + 33mm) right for a GWR King and probably nothing else and 19 ish mm or 4ft 9" ish wheels. They come in X04 powered with centre axle drive, X03 powered front axle drive and the small motor centre axle drive, in sprung and non sprung versions. None are any good for an 0-6-0 really, The X04 fills the cab, X03 sits too high, small motor too small. Probably best to work out what wheelbase chassis the body is meant for, (Not the scale wheelbase) and work back from that. Some of these Kits need major surgery to fit a chassis with scale wheelbase like the K's body line kits of 0-6-0 tanks for the H/D chassis . The Wills (?) 2251 is a wonderfully bad example.

P1is very close as regards coupled wheelbase at 6ft -6ft- 6ft 6" 24-24-26mm from from front to rear but its about 8ft pony truck to front coupled 32MM and 9ft rear coupled to Trailing truck 36mm. Could it be H0 or a 0- 16.5 loco.

From what I can see Hornby made points, and Hornby badged other peoples points and Hornby have points made in the far east to a range of specifications and various qualities including using steel and nickle silver rail at different times, Generally the points of similar style are interchangeable. With some exceptions Peco set track has similar geometry but the Hornby points I have used are generally more robust and more suitable for assembling on the kitchen table or lounge floor or Patio for an operating session, they have better over centre springs than Peco, better point blade contacts, better surface mount point motors but don't look as good and cannot easily be operated by under baseboard mounted point motors. I happily mix Peco set track and Peco Streamline points, the improved appearance and closer track spacing makes a big difference and the shallower angles create a lot less derailments, and the smallest Streamline point, the small Y is a lot shorter than any Set Track point while the standard 2nd radius Set track point is 15" radius through the bades and is as long as a 2ft radius streamline point. I wouldn't swap Hornby for Peco set track, I would redesign and use streamline points if you want an upgraade.

I mix Streamline code 100 flexi and points with set track all the time. Often using set track where the track needs to be straight and for sharpish curves to stop them kinking and flexi when a nice smooth curve is needed. You can slide off flexi rail chairs and slide them on to nice rigid set track rails if you pry the fishplate off and remove any residual "Pip" A rail cutter, pliers, hacksaw, cutting disc etc and a file to true the end up will cut the rails to length and you can get the non standard "Set track" bits you need, I also treat set tracklike flexi by cutting the links between sleepers and bending set track curve to sharper or usually larger radius I have even done that to the old steel set track and Hornby system 6. I cut set track points and live frog them and reduce the track spacing. as it makes small layouts look much larger if not overdone so passing trains actually collide. My latest layout actually has 12" radius flexi curves and is only just over 2ft wide by 6ft long inspired by one they used to have at Bekra Model Railways at Newton Abbott. I would like to say it only has small locos but a Triang Princess 4-6-2 can get round

Looking good. BUT you need a hacksaw, cutting Disc or specialist rail cutter to cut some of the set track to length to make it happen. Having done that I would lengthen the top loop (Which would need a long straight trimming to slightly longer than a short one at the top) and maybe take the lower sidings off nearer the left end, left hand point or curved. You could splay the sidings as The Johnster suggests or alternatively squeeze them together as sometimes instead of a cart size gap between two sidings there was access from both sides. The 60mm set track spacing falls between two stools Widest 00 RTR is 40mm so 45mm gap is do able but means sawing points and curves while wide spacing needs a very short straight. Station buildings can look daft on small layouts. I would put the booking office waiting room etc away from the platform with a footbridge and also a barrow crossing for the disabled trolleys etc and a canopy over the platform. Chelenham Malvern Road had this Newton Abbott still has this and Corwen(?) being built by the LLangollen railway is similar

The Individual Loco draw is not relevant its when have too many locos or a short and then the amps do the damage to any poor connections, and particularly the point blade contact tags and blade pivots. Almlost all RTR points were designed for 1 amp max and some of mine have been around for 40 years and haven't had blades cleaned for 25 years plus but always with 1 amp circuit breakers. Others have been ruined by my 5 loco lash ups As I said my 2 X 1 amp power supplies have has fishplates glow red hot as 5 headed freights grind round, that is 2 X 12va power units each with a 1 amp breaker. Not many UK based modellers have done that but it was a big problem in the states before DCC and typically 4 amps. 15 volts is low, the old Hornby and H&M resistance controllers will show over 20 volts off load. The Morley will show a tiny fraction of a volt off load on minimum power

Not sure what 15 volt 2 amp power unit you have but 2 amps too much for most 00 track and locos. 1 amp circuit breakers are usual, Hornby Dublo used 0.9 amp I believe. I have had fishplates glowing red on 2 amps running 5 loco lash ups of Triang Transcontinental locos. As @Kevinlms says T7729 is cheap and may be PWM (pulse width modulation) which provides pulses which appear almost like rectangular blocks on an oscilloscope rather than a rectified AC mains derived DC supply, which shows as a series of curved domes pulsing at Mains frequency or a smoothed DC supply which shows as a straight line. PWM pulses create quite a racket on older locos. On Battery DC even old locos are eerily quiet. Some old controllers have half wave feature which deliberately causes pulses supposedly to improve crawling, it does not, but it does make it possible to run old Triang locos down hill slowly. I personally am a big fan of Morley Controllers, they have a really excellent hand held add on and very good control. If you continue to use the 15volt 2 amp I would recommend a 1 amp breaker between controller and track. Then again I recommend that to DCC users and they take zero notice and wonder why their point blades don't conduct after a while.

Just soak the chipboard In my experience once damp it will disintegrate,I absolutely hate the stuff, heavy weak no water resistance. I replaced the chipb0ard on my garage roof and shed roof with tongue and groove after the chipboard disintegrated. If patience is not your strong suit then a wallpaper scraper 5 for £1 at Poundland with the edge sharpened on the grinder is a pretty useful tool for getting under the sleepers freeing the track, just slide under the track don't try to lift it until it's absolutely loose. When I have done track reclamation, on layouts i bought, I often find broken sleepers in yard lengths when this happens I cut them out and slide the other sleepers up to close the gap, then raid short lengths for spare sleepers and make good. Don't use short lengths, old fishplates and old track means voltage drop so keep joints to a minimum, a feed every 6 joints is my aim on DC probably a feed for each yard plain track and several for each point is preferable for DCC .

My first question would be did it run better before fitting the de coder and if so how much was dismantled for the fitting. I have a std 5 somewhere, its too slow for passenger work and struggles to pull the skin off a milky Latte on freight but it runs smoothly enough. I can't remember if it is split chassis but if it is the split chassis halves can get out of square. The leading or another wheelset may not be symmetrical for crank throws so was it put back as it came out. It does not sound like the crank pin is hitting the connecting rod but that is a common failing if the rod is bent or the spacers are put back wrong. On a wiper pick up non split axle chassis the wiper hitting the wheel balance weight or something else on the wheel back.

I made a bogie tender from a Tri-ang Transcontinental Box car suitably shortened, Davy Crockett body shortened (to 4-6-0) Princess chassis Jinty Driving Wheels ettc.