HerbertFrederick

Good morning. I had tried to follow the advice offered before and downloaded Templot only to find that I cannot use it with a MAC. Is there a way round this please?

Would it be unreasonable to think that an item which a retailer states in stock should be sent relatively quickly? Card details given, postage rate unknown but suggested at a reasonable price yet payment not taken a day later.

I am not sure if this is the correct place for this post but it does concern O gauge. My brother, who isn't an RM member, was hunting about for some O gauge flexible track. He'd seen C&L and Marcway as being suppliers. However, he noticed that C&L now sell 8 x 1metre lengths for £66 instead of the original 10 lengths and Marcway's site just lists 1metre and price TBA. Are these companies having a price re-shuffle and has anyone else experienced this?

Gentlemen! I am most grateful for your prompt replies and the detailed replies from Hayfield and others. If I may clarify. My father bought a large amount of rolling stock and locomotives. I recall that my brother and I took him to the Cheltenham Model Railway shop as we were in the area. He then asked if they could supply from his list. This "list" turned out to be four sides of a double foolscap sheet and he paid £200 plus for 5 or more big boxes and that was in 1982. Some of the order was made of duplicates of a particular wagon or tank. I think he must have been "saving up". It was his usual practice, once RM had arrived, to go through all the classifieds at the front and mark out all the "Company Owned" trucks, tanks etc and this list was what he brought with him on that Saturday. There are 40 plus boxes of rolling stock and locomotives and most have never been out of their boxes. Not even to roll back and forth along a piece of track. Thus I suspect that I shall be changing a few wheel sets. My choice of P4 was and is based upon a desire to "do it once and do it right". While people like Tony Wright have produced lovely layouts in OO gauge somehow it just doesn't look right. I have some of my father's old Trix HO locomotives and on 16.5 track they look correct. Stick a 4mm/OO beside it and it looks like an elephant standing on the legs of a giraffe. That may not be too kind to those that use OO but those that use either EM or P4 might understand. I take note of the Exactoscale suggested and anything that makes life easy or easier is interesting. My proposed layout is probably too grand but why not build something big (theoretically) and tone it down as the building of it progresses? (Or my patience and stamina fade into the distance). Perhaps I could join the Scalefour Society. Thank you once again.

Having built baseboards I now need to buy track. I have a large amount of GWR rolling stock and locomotives to use so the layout is destined to be GWR. It would seem I have two choices for track. Marcway or C&L. However, unless I have it wrong, the C&L track would have to be hand built to be able to use the correct GWR chairs. I have looked at the C&L website and they sell 25 lengths of 1 yard and that would make my life much easier but it doesn't appear to be correct for GWR. Does anyone have any suggestions please

Just as an update. The baseboards are complete, apart from two very small sections and await the track. I used 4 x 1 PSE for the main frame supported on 2" x 2" legs. Then I covered this with 9mm plywood. Some modellers have been seen to glue 3mm cork on to the plywood and lay track on that. However, unlike sectional layouts such as those used on portable payouts eg 4' x 2' sections, a "one-piece" layout can provide a few extra problems. Where there are right angled joins between one sheet of 9mm plywood and another there is the possibility of a small step, despite the fact that both sheets are mounted on the same underframe. I mentioned this to a fellow club member and we discussed the possibility of using a sander to smooth out the joins. I haven't tried this yet but it might be a solution. Another modeller said he'd used a covering of cork over the entire layout to ensure a smooth(er) surface and then laid the 3mm underlay for the track. Having done the calculations I am going to need at least 21m of 1m wide cork sheet to do the layout. It is available in thicknesses of up to 5mm which should smooth out the imperfections. It would also make it relatively easy to pin things to it, if required. Some use "Foamex" or foam board to fill in the gaps between the 3mm ply under the track. I have considered this too but it appears to have a rather smooth surfaced perhaps this might make it difficult to stick things to. At this point I should add that I am hoping to use P4 as I have many boxes of OO gauge rolling stock and locomotives that my father bought.

Reading all the contributions, for which I am grateful, I decided to buy some 1/2" ply in 8 x 4 sheets. In order to brace it correctly I screwed my 45 x 21 lengths into 90 x 21s which should give the plywood sufficient support. One question. Plywood should be braced properly. What spacings would members who have built their baseboards from this material recommend. The baseboards that I stripped down had spacings at 420 mm something between 16 and 17 inches. While expensive on timber I would have thought it strong enough.

Clearly Sundeala is not regarded very favourably by some. However, unless it degrades/deteriorates in use surely it should be adequate if laid over a strong, supportive surface like 12 or even 18 mm plywood.

Good evening and thank you for your replies. If I may start at the beginning. The room is a pair of converted stables knocked into one. The outer walls are brick but the room was constructed as follows. The floor was laid on a smooth layer of sand over hardcore, then some 50mm insulation sheets. On top of the sheets is the re-enforced concrete. The walls were rather like a dog's hind leg so they were coated with a very thick layer of sand and cement screed (with water proofer) until they were true. Then they were fitted with 50 mm insulated plasterboard. The original ceiling(s) were pitched but a suspended ceiling was fitted above and this was covered with 50 mm insulation and then a plywood surface over that. I have a small de-humidifier that was used to dry the room after it was plastered and I could use that to ensure a reasonably level degree of humidity. It should be easy to keep the room warm with a small blower heater or an old Ecko Thermavent with a rheostat. The access door is 4' wide and made from PVC with a double glazed panel. Where there was a hit and miss window for ventilation this has been replaced by two small double glazed windows. I take the point that 45 x 20 timbers might be a little on the "light" side and I could lay one on top of the other, screwed and glued to give 90mm. I do not need to stand on my layout so that would suffice. I have at least six frames of 108" x 32" and enough spare timber to make more. I am grateful for the confirmation that Sundeala is unsuitable for a layout surface. I think it would be better to remove the 6mm ply that's on the frames at the moment and use 12mm which would increase the rigidity. Presumably the cork under the track would reduce the noise and if covered with ballast that's applied correctly it would not be seen.

Having created a space in which to build a layout I thought I would seek some advice. I found this forum yesterday when looking for sources of Sundeala. However, quite a lot of the comment on that material was negative. Quite whether the people who had used it and found it unsatisfactory had used it over a frame without anything beneath I could not determine. Clearly it is a material that needs to be laid on something substantial to prevent warping etc. It is said that before using it it must be laid flat in the room in which it is to be used. I have several sections of exhibition stand framing. Egg box if you like. 45 x 20 lengths of wood made into frames, braced at regular intervals and some have sheets of 6mm ply laid over them. It makes them relatively rigid but nothing like as good as some of the 100mm deep frame others have used. When I built a layout for my father over 30 years ago this was what we used. On top of the ply I made the mistake of using insulation board, far too fragile and while it would have reduced the noise it was the wrong material to use. e.g. it would not retain the track pins properly. The supports for the frames were simple 2" x 2" pine at the correct height for my father and screwed inside the frames. In order to ensure they remained in place we used plastic triangular bracket screwed into the loft's wooden surface. The sort of brackets that DIY stores used to sell for those making kitchen cabinets. However, the floor of the new location is re-enforced concrete and I will have to create rectangular frames as the floor is also covered with carpet tiles. The frames can sit on top of 2 x 2 timbers that are screwed to the walls. Assuming I make a nice, rigid structure, using my 45 x 20 wooden frames resting on the perimeter walls, possibly changing the 6mm ply for 12" ply (Birch or otherwise) what do I use as a baseboard top surface please, given the need to be easy to work with etc etc? I will try to take a couple of photos. It would seem a pity not to use the frames. After all, I have been looking after them for a long time