Jump to content


RMweb Gold
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Harlequin

  1. Sorry, don't know the answer to that. The type shown here is the original type with rigid fixings.
  2. Proper Job Cornish Pasties can be found at Hawke Butchers (proper job Cornish name) in Roche (proper job Cornish place away from the Emmets) here: https://www.google.com/maps/@50.4069644,-4.8339629,3a,75y,96h,76.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQgEJFQEAovOD1I1lOeeUBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (At least they used to be good last time I had one.) "It's a local shop for local people."
  3. Slightly tangentially: When ATC plungers were mounted just behind the buffer beam they had an extra fixture which I'm 99% sure was to prevent dangling couplings making electrical contact with the plunger body. The relevant parts are the creamy yellow side brackets and the blueish shaped bar around the front in this image. Those parts are electrically insulated from the plunger body by felt pads in the mountings (between the salmony pink part and the green mounting plates) and they are not present when the unit is mounted under the cab so it seems clear that they are to stop something making electrical contact with the unit and logic says that thing must be the coupling, hanging just inches in front. It's amazing what you can learn when you really study these things!
  4. The model railway / Bake Off connection fizzled out early, unfortunately.

    I was looking forward to lots of train cakes.

    1. Huw Griffiths

      Huw Griffiths

      I suspect you might not be alone.

    2. truffy


      I don’t like cake. I’m more of a cheese scones and crumpets man. But I can’t see much that you with them train-wise. 

  5. No problem with a DCC auto-reverser, or reversers, feeding a suitably large isolated section or sections. You could drive in and out in any direction and never notice even a twitch from your loco. The sections must be large enough to hold the longest train to avoid problems and I think there's room enough in Zomboid's plan, given that trains are unlikely to be much longer than the platforms, at around ~6ft.
  6. Minories specifically allows for inbound traffic to arrive directly into any platform and outbound traffic to leave directly from any platform so that it can handle quick turn around suburban commuter services. The pointwork could be simpler if P1 was only for departures. The route from Inbound to P1 would not be needed and so the double slip could become a single. But that then might lead to further revisions because it would make more sense for the carriage sidings to be on the outbound side and the slip crossing would then not be needed at all... If you can't arrive directly into P1 then it's not Minories any more but it might be better suited for the OP's intended services.
  7. It would be great for the big Pacifics to have a really smooth run in to the platforms but the double slip causes a very sudden deviation for the route into platform 1 because it is nominally a 2ft radius part. That's a shame because I can see you've used Medium radius (nominally 3ft) turnouts elsewhere. It's very difficult to replace the slip with normal turnouts without introducing some unwanted reverse curves but it might be possible to do it in such a way that the reverse curves are very subtle and only in the route to the carriage sidings headshunt. (Or maybe you can just avoid ever sending large express locos from Down into Platform 1.) BTW: Many of your Medium radius turnouts could be replaced by Large radius versions without affecting the plan significantly.
  8. Just to be clear for Clive, the "shuttle" idea would allow a DMU to automatically run back and forth on the branch line without getting tangled up with other train operations. So you could just set it going and ignore it while you do other things. The gradients and heights are generous enough to allow for a small level section somewhere on the branch line so "Lyneworth High Level" halt is definitely possible with a pedestrian connection via steps or by extending the footbridge. It would also be possible to give the branch line it's own spur under Millhampton to give a longer shuttle run without having to cross onto main line tracks. But having one end of the shuttle run hidden might be less satisfying... (And if the layout was computer controlled the shuttle service could run down into it's intended home, the Millhampton bay - but that's getting silly!)
  9. Just to push the through-station + fiddle-yard + BLT concept to a conclusion and to show that it could be a nice workable design for someone, if not you Clive, here's where I got to with my idea. This is the main level: At Lyneworth I added carriage sidings, laid out the MPD and increased the length of the headshunt. The fiddle yard loops have been joggled to clear the support posts for Millhampton and an extra crossover added to get branch traffic onto the inner through line as directly as possible, leaving the loops purely for storage. Simple lifting flap across the doorway with straight track joints - easy to build. And then the high level, terminating at something like 170mm above the main level: The branch line climbs behind Lyneworth @ 1 in 50, separated by a retaining wall which becomes a viaduct and crosses over the main line (always fun to see one train running above another). It spans the doorway on another lifting flap, also with straight track joints. The angle allows the curve into Millhampton to be more open than the 2nd and 3rd radius curves nearby on the main level. Millhampton is your classic BLT but in the steam transition era the engine shed and/or the goods shed have been sold off and are now occupied by local businesses, such as perhaps a brewery. Millhampton leaves the bulk of the fiddle yard open for access and the covered parts are easily within reach. If you add minimal viaduct-top detail to the branch line flap and a simple sky backscene around the room behind it, it could look very effective and give you scenery all round the room.
  10. Is there enough room to move around the peninsula terminus? Can it be supported with enough strength that it won't get knocked off level and the tracks possibly disconnected?
  11. I think it needs a "visual full stop" there but a backscene alone won't be enough if it portrays "the distance" like backscenes usually do because then the scene would still trail away with no obvious end. I suggest that instead of a backscene something within the scene should provide the full stop, such as a large building or a clump of trees (if it's a sheltered harbour). Perhaps something related to the sea. Chandlers warehouse, boat shed, seaman's chapel? Stubby lighthouse? (I notice that the bits of ply you were holding up are not full end scenes, they all have a relationship to the harbour wall - so you're already thinking about the end being part of the model rather than the edge of the world...)
  12. Half an hour's work in a drawing program: Just the tracks and the signals.
  13. Hi Colin, Getting back to coaching stock for a 1930s Westcountry branch line that’s more substantially laid than the Culm Valley, you could consider the upcoming Kernow Railmotor. I believe Railmotors still operated shuttle services out of Exeter in this period, over at least part of the Moretonhampstead branch, for instance. Regarding Westcountry B Sets (B sets had different formations in different GWR divisions, as you pointed out above) you could still consider the new Hornby 57’ bow ended non-corridor stock (e.g. a left & right pair of brake thirds?) - if you’re willing to sprinkle some Rule1 dust on them. They are very good models, more refined than the old Airfix “B set”, and both Hattons and Kernow have had them on offer recently.
  14. Hi Mick, You can snip parts out of an image but the parts will then be bitmap, possibly with small marks on them and with an edge that needs to be disguised. So my technique, which should also work in LibreOffice, is to draw new versions of the symbols and then copy and paste them around the drawing as needed. That way they are clean and because they are drawings, not bits of an image, can be adapted as needed. That’s how I created the Helston drawing, above. Also in that drawing, the tracks are drawn using a “brush” to simulate the ink/pencil borders and the watercolour fill of the real thing. That means that they are easy to draw and easy to adjust. That is something that you need a dedicated drawing program to achieve.
  15. I hope @Iain1491 is going to tell us what he found out and whether he fixed the problem. We need closure!
  16. Lots of programs have drawing abilities shoe-horned into them and can do simple tasks but to have complete freedom to draw what you want, with the ability to change it easily, to make it look good and not to have it squashed down to pixels you need a drawing program. Affinity Designer is relatively cheap, non-subscription, made in the UK, works in both Mac and Windows and is award winning. And I say that with some pain because I work on a competing program, Xara Designer.
  17. Hi Peter, I think you need a drawing program, like Xara Designer, Affinity Designer or Adobe Illustrator. When combined with knowledge of the prototype diagrams and input from signalling experts it’s possible to make something reasonably authentic like this: (Created for @Andy Keane’s Helston) A signal box diagram is a slightly different beast from a mimic diagram, so you need to be clear which you are actually going for, but a drawing program is the most flexible way to make either.
  18. Storage loops on the lifting section seems to be a contradiction in terms... You can't store anything there when you want to lift the section to get in or out.
  19. Curved turnouts are extremely useful in helping formations to fit in small spaces and I use them a lot in my layout designs but I confess that I am one of the worriers. I have a Code 75 version on my test track that trails into a 26in radius curve. It's absolutely fine in the trailing direction but propelling long stock through it, or driving steam locos with a leading bogie or pony through it, in the facing direction is a source of derailments for me. I haven't worked out exactly what's going on but the derailments happen at the common crossing (the "frog") and I suspect it's something to do with wheelset back-to-backs. So probably not a problem with the turnout itself, just that it exposes problems in the rolling stock. That's just my experience.
  20. Have you considered using twisted pair wiring to counter the interference? If it works it would mean much less disruption to your wiring runs. https://sites.google.com/site/markgurries/home/dcc-general-best-practices/wiring-planing/twisted-pair-wiring
  21. Hmmm, yes. Edit: Adding some carriage sidings to my version of Lyneworth would go some way towards addressing this. I put this suggestion forward, though, specifically to show Clive a design with a separate fiddle yard and the good and bad things that it brings - somewhere for trains to go to and come from, somewhere where densely packed stock doesn't look odd, somewhere you can handle stock to change things around but on the other hand the amount of valuable space it consumes. I'm not sure that Clive has expressed a preference one way or the other yet...???
  22. I don't think so - unless I've missed something. Down the branch line, through one of the bidirectional centre fiddle yard loops (which are all effectively trailing crossovers), then on the anti-clockwise line into Lyneworth station, terminate at the anti-clockwise through platform, (loco may then run round if it's a loco hauled service) cross over to the clockwise and set back into the bay.
  23. FWIW, Here's my suggestion fleshed out a bit: It's just the main level. I haven't decided how much of the branch line I would make visible yet and I haven't laid out Millhampton but I'm thinking that the brewery would be up there. I also haven't laid out the MPD. The fiddle yard has nine loops, 2 up, 2 down and 5 bi-directional. The bi-directional loops can store 7ft trains. Off-scene facing crossovers allow trains to enter any loop. The curves in the top left corner are R2 and R3.
  24. How about something like this very rough sketch? I flipped it over to use the "south" side of the room, with more space beside the doorway, for the main station. The thinner side with the tighter radius curves next to the door is then for a non-scenic fiddle yard. The branch line junction is not in Lyneworth station, it's further down the line. (It's actually hidden in the fiddle yard so it doesn't have to be realistic.) This remote junction arrangement is very common in the real world. A bay is provided in Lyneworth station for the branch passenger trains. There are no "artificial" tunnels. Main line trains disappear through a scenic break into the fiddle yard and reappear from the fiddle yard further round the circuit. Either or both of those scenic breaks could be tunnel portals. There's a little bit of operational awkwardness in that any goods train from Lyneworth to Millhampton has to be run around and crossover from the inner anti-clockwise side to the outer clockwise. But hey, that sort of thing happened in the real world and it makes life "interesting". If Millhampton doesn't cover many tracks on the main level (as shown) the elevation of Millhampton, and where the gradient starts, is quite flexible. But if the worked out design required Millhampton to cover more main level tracks then it would need to be high enough to give good clearance and the gradient would need to be long enough to reach it. Aim for minimum 1 in 50 if you can. The drawing shows the longest possible gradient, which would give something like 200mm elevation at 1:50 or 133mm at 1:75 - allowing for transitions and a level section across the doorway.
  • Create New...