ejstubbs

Many thanks, Mike. I think we would most likely have alighted at Haverfordwest. I'm certain that I was travelling with my Mum, and I think that Dad had driven down ahead of us and would have picked us up from H'west. I have another memory of changing trains at Clarbeston Road, at night in the middle of winter. I think it would have been in the early '80s when my parents had actually relocated to Letterston for a year while their retirement home was being built. The night was as black as old Harry, and it was cold and drizzling. I could see a pub from the platform - Old Maps suggests it was the Picton Inn. Those were the days when I used to smoke, and you could smoke in pubs, and the smell of beer and fags was mighty tempting...but my desire to catch my connection was stronger than my thirst for ale, so I hung around on the gloomy platform under a rather dim platform light until my train turned up. Quite why I had to change at Clarbeston Road I'm not sure. I assume that, again, I was heading for Haverfordwest - Mathry Road station was but a dim memory by then. Perhaps I'd got there on a Fishguard Harbour train - no Fishguard and Goodwick station in them days either - and it was easier to get picked up from H'west. Actually, now I come to think, I said that Mathry Road station was but a dim memory: as far as I can find out it closed in 1965. The family only started holidaying in Letterston in 1964, and I definitely remember us all walking down with Dad to meet Mum off the train there once, so that must be an earlier memory than I thought. Sorry for veering wildly

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-essex-41350969/lorry-driver-jailed-for-crashing-into-level-crossing-barriers Wow. He started crossing against the lights, hit the descending barrier on the exit side of the crossing then stopped to walk around his vehicle before continuing on his way...

Wrong thread: that argument is here. Bottom line: people are going to have to agree to disagree because there is no "right" answer - there are pros and cons on both sides.

I believe you may be over-thinking this. Have a look at this diagram, which shows turnouts formed from Streamline small radius points on each side of a half oval formed of Setrack curves: The separation on the straights is 52mm, which is what you get with crossovers formed from Streamline points. The separation at the midpoint of the curve is 67mm, since that's what you get with Setrack curves starting with the rail ends level. All that the mixed geometry results in is a 2 x (67-52) = 30mm gap at the midpoint of the inner curve, which you can fill with a cut down length of Setrack straight - no need for any flexi. The curves may look a bit odd going from 52mm to 67mm track separation (though I'd suggest that it's not all that noticeable) but you've said that they'll be hidden anyway, so who cares? You need to be a bit careful to avoid problems with stock clearances as the track separation reduces. If you go for 3rd and 4th radius instead of 2nd and 3rd as I've drawn it then the risk would be lower. That said, on my previous layout using 2nd and 3rd radius wasn't a problem: You can build more complicated configurations so long as you remember the angles used in the Streamline and Setrack geometries (primarily 12º, and 22.5º/45º), and you can do a bit of trigonometry. Sines and cosines are all you need - I use a small Excel spreadsheet that I can plug track endpoint co-ordinates in to, and it tells me the length of straight track needed to fill the gap. This is as an adjunct to AnyRail as my track planning tool. Other programmes are available but I find AnyRail by far the easiest to use for this kind of layout design. The functionality of each the others I've tried seems to be much more oriented towards the use of flexible track, which IMO just gets in the way when you actually want to stick to using modular track. AnyRail can do flexible track (that's what the cut-down Setrack straights actually are in the diagram above) but other design tools are probably better if you're going for Streamline throughout. By the way, I also use Setrack curves cut down to a 12º angle to form parallel sidings and the like in combination with Streamline points, although I try to avoid it other than for fans of sidings - where arguably flexi laid "by eye" can usually do the job just as well anyway. You can use the Setrack ST238 "special curve" (intended to be used with the Setrack Y point) which is actually larger radius than the Streamline small radius points, but as the curve is only 11.25º you have to use two of them, eg both cut down to 6º, which is a bit of a bodge (though that doesn't mean that I don't do it if the need arises ). Remember to use code 100 Streamline points, so that they match the profile of the Setrack rail. Unless you absolutely need electrofrog diamonds or slips, in which case you need either the SL-113 code 75 to code 100 converter track (which is the same length as the Setrack ST203 straight - "the totty wee one" as the lady in my local model shop calls it), or the SL-112 combined rail joiners. I don't have any personal experience of either of those products so I can't say anything more than that they exist, I'm afraid. There are quite a few other threads on RMWeb where combining Setrack and Streamline is discussed, eg here, here and here.

Not in a race, but I still remember being dumbstruck to read about Gilles Villeneuve going nearly ten seconds a lap quicker than his Ferrari team-mate at Watkins Glen in the torrentially wet first practice session for the 1979 US Grand Prix. http://en.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/6630.html http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/history/f1/i-was-there-when-1979-united-states-gp (You can see footage of the race - which started in the wet - on YouTube. Check out Villeneuve's lurid slide out of - I think - Turn 8 at about 4:30.)

This is true. For clarity, though, can I just point out that the post you replied to recommended "cassettes (or a traverser in some circumstances)". Cassettes do not have the extra width demands that traversers do. You obviously have to have somewhere to put the cassettes but they can, for example, be put on shelves out of the way above the layout - in fact IIRC this was exactly what was shown in Chris Pendleton's article about cassettes in issue 27 of MRJ back in 1988 which is supposed to have started the whole idea. The other thing to remember about the width requirement when using a traverser is that it needs space on both sides of the tracks leading to the scenic area - you can't have the tracks hard up against a wall. Again, not an issue with cassettes. If you're resigned to manhandling cassettes about then it's barely any more effort to make the power connections with fly leads and croc clips, especially if you're using Pendleton-style cassettes based on aluminium angle. But there are many options for neater and slicker ways to achieve the desired result if that's your preference.

Oi! Guy Martin is undoubtedly a character and gets up to all sorts of stuff - his record-breaking cycle ride across that desert in China was pretty impressive - but I won't stand for anyone dissing Fred!

I travelled on that sleeper service, or one very like it, in the down direction, at least once when I was a kid in the 1960s. I distinctly remember being woken up in the early-ish hours by a station announcer who seemed to be very keen that everyone knew we'd arrived at Carmarthen - he must have repeated the station name about ten times! I don't think that we alighted at Milford Haven, though - the family's holiday cottage was in Letterston. Would the service have set passengers down anywhere else eg Clarbeston Road or Haverfordwest?

36-872 and 36-873 are non-isolating and are intended to be ready-to-run for DCC ie without having to add the clips that Hornby sell to convert their isolating points for DCC use. As melmerby's linked photo makes clear, they have a huge chunk of plastic at the frog so aren't in any way "live frog". In fact they are mechanically identical to the isolating versions, only differing in the electrical switching between routes ie not having any.

I presume the OP means that certain locos do derail in the Fleischmann points. Yes, it is perfectly possible to use Peco Code 100 Streamline electrofrog points with Setrack straights and curves. However, the Streamline points do not match the Setrack curve radii or angles, or indeed the standard lengths of the straight sections of track, so it almost inevitably means you have to chop some of the Setrack pieces to work with the Streamline geometries. There can be other small tweaks required on top of this. It's not particularly difficult but it's that step away from the plug-and-play nature of pure Setrack. There are plenty of threads on RMWeb on this particular topic eg here, here and here. As I understand it, the Fleischmann geometry is different again (8º turnout angle and different curve radii) so neither Peco nor Hornby Setrack will be a direct replacement, if that's what the OP was hoping.

The NEM 362 standard only covers the size and location of the pocket, and the swallowtail which fits in the pocket. How the pocket is attached to the item of stock, and what kind of actual coupling is on the other end of swallowtail clip, are both outside the scope of the standard. Hence Dapol's method of mounting the pocket is very different to Bachmann's (at least on the Dapol wagons I have - or it was before I converted them to Kadee whisker couplings), not to mention fixed NEM pockets on some locomotives, and on close-coupling units. Then there are multiple subtle - and some not-so-subtle - variations on tension lock couplings with NEM swallowtails (eg the Hornby large NEM TLC), plus Kadee knuckle couplings, and Hornby/Roco close couplings. Those couplings all comply with the NEM 362 standard, but many of them (even some the TLCs) are not interoperable.

Best? I'd nominate The Wages of Fear (1958). It was also the inspiration for an episode of The Goon Show. As was Ill Met by Moonlight (1957), and no doubt many others. But not Quatermass and the Pit (1967). The 1959 Goon Show episode The Scarlet Capsule was based on the TV version broadcast in 1958/59; it even used some of the same sound effects tapes, as created by the BBC Radiophonic Workshop.

We should have a house warming party! There's a plan for Minories with a two-siding goods yard in what I think is the latest edition of 60 Plans for Small Locations (the 1989 edition - mine is the 2014 ninth impression). It's plan number SP36 on page 21. (I can't post a scan of it here for copyright reasons but the booklet is readily available in model shops and online, and isn't at all expensive.) In the plan the sidings are shown as 'parcels' but there's nothing to stop you putting a small goods shed and crane - or anything you like, really - there instead. So long as you had a bit more width available then it would be straightforward to add more sidings if you wanted to. The plan is better than Cannons Cross IMO because the goods yard is accessed directly from a separate headshunt parallel to 'platform 3'. That reduces the amount of to-ing and fro-ing required before an incoming freight could be shunted. The idea would probably be that goods trains would be shunted on arrival by the train engine. Alternatively, the train engine could propel the train from the headshunt in to a 'reception' siding, then toddle off to be coaled and watered at the stabling point while the station pilot did the shunting and assembled the outgoing train. Departure in that case would be by the pilot hauling the outbound train in to the headshunt, then uncoupling and sitting on the buffers while the train engine coupled to the front of the train and took the train out. This post on the Minories track plan wanted thread goes in to the differences between the two approaches in a bit more detail (I'm not sure about that run-round on the headshunt, though - it seems to detract from the simplicity of the Minories concept). This post on the Minories Holborn Viaduct thread has drawings of a modular version of Minories which CJ Freezer apparently published in the 1981 'extra' issue of Model Railways, which includes a goods yard on a separate baseboard, accessed by a rather complicated junction off the main line before the station throat. There's a good article about shunting goods trains on a small terminus layout in the November 2003 issue of Railway Modeller. You can usually pick up old issues of magazines on eBay for not much money. For future reference, you can send Andy Y a private message by clicking on the "Send me a message" button on his profile page that I linked to in my previous post. That's a lot more reliable than simply hoping that he will read your post (out of hundreds, possibly into the thousands) that are posted every day. (I think it worked this time because he was keeping an eye on the thread after his post yesterday.)

Obviously don't publish your address on the blog - I assume that Pelham Street isn't the name of the street where you live. Nor would it appear likely to be your real name, so that removes directories or register of electors as ways to track you down. Blogs usually include photos of the layout. I'd would be careful to make sure that any photos you post don't include in the background any features of your property or its environs (eg views through windows) which might make it easier to locate and identify. You also need to be a little careful not to over-share information in your text which might help pinpoint the property. It can be surprisingly easy to identify a property from a small amount of information eg it's near the mobile phone tower and has a red Ford Focus on the driveway (both visible through a window in photos on the blog), has recently installed double glazing (the window itself), and is two doors down from a corner shop (you happened to mention that the helpful shopkeeper takes in parcels from Hattons for you when you're out). Unfortunately there are lots of ways that ne'er-do-wells can find things out about you, and always have been, long before the Internet was invented. The postie might notice that you get a lot packages from certain retailers, deduce that you're a keen modeller like him and - while he might be honest as the day is long himself - mention it in passing to some acquaintances down the pub one of whom might not have such strong scruples. You could even be overheard talking about it to a friend in your local. But at the end of the day the insurers know that the bad guys are clever at taking advantage of normal day-to-day behaviour to pick targets so I doubt whether they're going to ask too many questions about how a burglar might have known to target your property unless you've been blatantly irresponsible. That said, you should make sure that your models are insured. You may regard the models themselves as being irreplaceable but if you don't actually tell the insurance company about their value then they may regard you as being uninsured if anything does get nicked, which can in turn reduce the amount they will pay out on other stuff. If you don't have an intruder alarm, get one. Having the alarm box on the outside of the house is a classic way to make your property a slightly less attractive target to a would-be burglar. And if everyone in the street has a visible alarm, they will look closer to see which ones are the dummies...

The people of Dull are also busy forging links with Bland in New South Wales: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-scotland-40751601/dull-pairs-with-boring-and-welcomes-bland Here's another unusual twinning sign in Scotland: Explanations here, here and here. (I am also reminded that there is one RMWebber whose profile picture features the sign directing travellers to an Orkney village the name of which I probably can't mention on the forum.)

I suspect that this sort of technology may become quite common on the roads when the major manufacturers start living up to their commitments to phase out IC-only powerplants for passenger cars within the next decade. (Which might be a disappointment to anyone who didn't read behind the recent spate of headlines sufficiently to understand that none of them actually committed to making nothing but electric cars.)

Goods yard options for Minories-based layouts have already been discussed on this thread (albeit admittedly more in the sense of "don't do it this way" - but even that is useful information). There are two fairly active threads on the Layout & Track Design sub-forum about Minories being used as the basis/inspiration for various different layout designs, here and here. The subject of goods facilities for Minories-based layouts is discussed multiple times on those two threads. I'd suggest sitting down with a large cup of tea and having a good browse through them. Even if a particular post doesn't appear immediately relevant to your situation, it might spark ideas/thoughts or at least add to your stock of background knowledge eg regarding realistic operation of trains. You might also want to consider whether you even need dedicated goods facilities. If you're not that keen on shunting then you could very plausibly get by with nothing more than van traffic using one of the platforms "out of hours". (On the other hand, if shunting is your thing then I would go out on a limb and suggest that you should steer well clear of Setrack points: IME they are not well suited to situations where slow and careful control of the loco is needed, and their tight radii and large nominal angles are not ideal for propelling moves.) I would also strongly recommend contacting the site admin Andy Y and asking him to move this thread to the Layout & Track Design forum, which is specifically intended for threads discussing design options and recommendations. Layout topics is more for people to start threads about layouts that they have designed and are in the process of building. You will likely get more responses if the thread turns up in the right place. Finally, as The Johnster says: please stop bumping. It really does get rather irritating if a thread is listed as recently updated then, when people look at it to see what's new, all they find is another "gimme" post. It does not leave a good impression of the poster, and can appear quite demanding and rude. At the very least have something substantive to say about the way that your own thoughts are going after reading other people's input - that shows that you are taking on board the ideas and suggestions that people are offering out of their own good will, and is a good way to keep the discussion moving forward rather than just seeming to be a dumping ground for everyone else's ideas with no supporting feedback being forthcoming.

I think you'll find that the lassie in question is called Naomi Watts http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0915208/?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm If she came and did cartwheels for me, I'd be more than impressed.

Stupid passive-aggressive faux irony. An understandable first inclination would be to respond: "Sorry to hear that you are unable to understand... ...can I suggest that you try harder, or if necessary get training in the subject." What the lickspittle who uses that phrase actually means is: "This doesn't make sense. Please explain/clarify/provide more detail..." But for some reason such straightforward statements and requests appear to be beneath the dignity of some people. In a rational world such people's inability to express themselves clearly and effectively should be a considerable impediment to their future career progression.

Coupled with - and probably reinforced by - the near-certainty that there will never be any comeback if their interventions turn out to cause more harm than good. The worst they are likely to suffer is loss of future business from that client - though you can bet your boots they'll still list them as customers on their marketing material. Apart from instances where a consultancy encouraged an organisation to commit criminal acts (hello, Arthur Andersen and Enron) no-one ever goes after a consultancy for giving bad advice. Probably because companies usually employ consultants to recommend something they were already thinking of doing anyway, but needed cover from an 'independent' source to justify. Plus consultancy contracts are usually heavily hedged with clauses limiting the consultants liability if it does all go pear-shaped. As the old joke goes: a consultant is someone who borrows your watch to tell you the time...and keeps your watch. My advice to anyone who works in an organisation which decides to employ McKinseys is: be afraid. Be very afraid.

Red Bull to split with Renault at end of 2018 season - although the article actually seems to be saying that Renault have told RB that they will have to look elsewhere, rather than i being RB's choice as the headline implies. So that would seem to rule out Honda as an "option" for RB - more like their only option. And McLaren are expected to announce that they'll be using Renault engines from next season. So RB and McLaren with the same engine supplier for one season: could be interesting.

I've not seen that one, but I have seen Sphere - or perhaps more accurately, I sat in a cinema with some friends while the film was being shown - and I thought it was very bad. Part of the problem was that my friends and I had recently completed our PADI dive training. Now, this didn't mean that we knew everything that there was to know about diving so that we could spot all the technical errors, but even we knew that the PADI recreational dive tables (which the protagonists are shown consulting during their descent to the deep sea habitat) are snuff all use to you at 1,000ft down. IIRC this was another film where one of the characters announces "we're all going to die!" and my immediate thought was "please hurry up". I'm not a big fan of Crichton's work - although Jurassic Park was pretty decent - but Sphere plumbed the depths IMO. The reason I didn't walk out of that one was that we were in Banff, our accommodation was in Lake Louise, and the next Greyhound wasn't for another three hours. SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! SPOILER WARNING!!! Sphere also has one of those dreadful everyone's-memories-get-erased cop-out ending. (Which is in the same league of awfulness as the "it was all a dream" cliche.) As monsters from the ID films go, The Forbidden Planet was much, much better. It probably helped that it was based on a Shakespeare play. And it had Leslie Nielsen in it - and Robby the Robot, who later appeared in the Lost in Space TV series.

Or even buffer locking. (Isn't lock buffering what happens when an inland waterway gets very busy?)

I believe Free At Last was making a joke. There are no pictures on that thread since photobucket banned third party hosting.

One of the good things about Minories and its ilk is that it's the terminus of a double track main line, rather than a single track, so you can have trains arriving and departing in close succession (or even simultaneously, if you have the mental bandwidth to drive two trains at once - or two operators, or computer control). It was designed the way it is for pretty much exactly that reason. I'd suggest having a look through danstercivicman's Birmingham Hope Street layout thread as an example. Helpfully, he has provided the timetable that he operates the layout to. My layout, while not being Minories-like (it only has two platforms for start, rather than three) is the terminus of a double track main line for similar reasons (although my operations are by no means as intensive as are achieved on some Minories layouts).