[Episode 7: Loose Ends, Last Orders and a Fresh Challenge]

Thanks @AndyB and @Phil Parker.  From memory, author Nigel Adams was a Vicar in Coventry.  I remember going to a model railway show they put on inside his Church (I think there were half a dozen layouts, all O Gauge / Scale). I seem to recall he was also involved in the Talyllyn (volunteer guard?).  I did have a copy of the book, must have been twenty years ago now.  Melbridge Dock is an excellent example of a small layout that has stood the test of time.

 

Not sure I’ve seen a plan for Wyandotte Transfer before, but it was another well-known layout back in the day: I think it was featured in “The Encyclopedia of Model Railways” sold as a Marks and Spencer “St Michael” book in the late 1970s / early 1980s.  Thanks Andy - two very good examples (and a good cake joke too), Keith.

 

[Episode 7: Loose Ends, Last Orders and a Fresh Challenge]

Thanks @AndyB - exactly the kind of ideas I’m already having:

 

3 hours ago, AndyB said:

I'm wondering if a small (hinged halfway) FY to terminus layout might work...with removable buildings for compactness.  Two  3' x 12"?

 

Definitely on the list for consideration: something I could tackle in either Narrow Gauge H0e or early-era German H0 with what I already have (previous pictures refer).  I’m reminded of the ideas a few years back for IKEA Billy-bookcase layouts.

 

For a larger project with my big kits and longer trains, I could see if a Minories-type terminus / FY might be possible, or at least a working diorama rather than a shelf display of stand-alone buildings?  (As you say, I do enjoy making structures).

 

3 hours ago, AndyB said:

Or a US-themed shunting plank with a hidden FY siding inside a low relief warehouse. 

 

…perhaps like this one, which I have in stock - when built it is 19.5” long, enough for a couple of boxcars to be hidden:

 

 

In my break today I’ve spray painted the parts of this kit to get it ready for assembly.  It wouldn’t take long to get started, as despite several rounds of clearing out and slimming down my collection(s), I still have the buildings for a US switching layout - add a transload / team track facility and there’s more than enough for a portable Inglenook:

 

 

My first task though is to put the brakes on - even with the busyness of Easter, this is the stage in the ideas process where I can easily go in to hyperdrive: with almost 50 years of studying track plans and ideas to call on I’m already generating too many ideas - it is settling on something that is genuinely practicable and seeing it through that needs consideration.

 

Knowing me, I’ll be tempted again by smaller scales, even though my exploring has proved H0 gives me a nice balance when it comes to the proportion of modelling time to be spent on the frustrating fiddly bits (every scale has fiddly bits).  Z-scale remains enticing, but as I struggled with some of the detail in N (esp. couplings), I need to be disciplined / realistic about how I’d fare when things started to break on a Z-scale layout (static model shown here with H0 Sam): 

 

 

My hope is that moving house and starting with a clean slate will give me the incentive to change my thinking about what will satisfy me as a layout project(s) - to match that with what I will actually have storage space for.  There is certainly much to be said in support of your final observation:

 

4 hours ago, AndyB said:

Not forgetting that a small, nicely modelled layout trumps a large mediocre layout every time.

 

Very true - there are some fantastic small and micro-layouts around.  Once we get the keys to our new home (which should be soon), I can try and turn the excitement of new opportunities into project ideas - all being well, that’ll be what happens next, Keith.

[Episode 7: Loose Ends, Last Orders and a Fresh Challenge]

Thank you @Mikkel - for clarifying that I do indeed mean ‘no dedicated layout running space’.  No self-respecting fan of micro-layouts can claim there’s no layout space at all, and your Farthing layouts / modules are a wonderfully creative application of the concept.  The explanation in your comment of how you manage to arrange modelling practically is particularly helpful as a useful guide to minimising disruption to home life, thank you.  A welcome aid to domestic harmony!
 

The Model Railroader author and contributor Pelle Søeborg is another modeller who comes to mind who’s face the challenge and moved to diorama modelling.

 

Steering my ideas back to micro-layouts would require some careful thought - the structures and trains I’ve been buying haven’t been collected with that approach in mind, but could be an option - perhaps alongside (or as part of) a portable layout?  I certainly feel encouraged by the responses from yourself, @ian and @AndyB.  Thanks to all, Keith.

 

[Episode 7: Loose Ends, Last Orders and a Fresh Challenge]

Remember the dreams of railroad empires we used to sketch out in our youth (and sometimes still do)?  While sorting some stuff this morning I found this plan for the Cumbres & Toltec 3’ Gauge Railroad.  I’ve not been there, so it must have come with a calendar I had a few years ago:  

 

 

In the context of this blog post and conversation, it struck me as exactly the sort of thing I think still sits behind my perpetual flow of over-ambitious project ideas, so it seemed relevant to share it here.  Beautiful!  Keith.

[Episode 7: Loose Ends, Last Orders and a Fresh Challenge]

2 hours ago, ian said:

Is there perhaps a local club that have premises that could house a portable layout?

Thanks @ian, an interesting idea - our 009 Society Group doesn’t have a premises (a hall is rented for monthly meetings), but there are several societies locally I could talk to, including the very active local club whose buildings are close by (the club to whom I donated my American HO buildings).  Thanks, Keith.

 

[Episode 7: Loose Ends, Last Orders and a Fresh Challenge]

Thanks @AndyB, the outhouse has proved useful.  The baseboards I brought with me sat untouched in the garage for a couple of years after we moved, until I began my Great Western Adventure(s) during the 2020 lockdowns, and I realised the outhouse was the perfect workshop for spring and summer.

 

At the new house, I’m afraid the garden is very small, as the house is on a corner: in the old days that would have meant a house with a big garden and plenty of room, but now it means two houses squashed in with small triangular shaped rear gardens meeting at the point instead.  There is a shed already (for garden tools, etc) and a conservatory, but not room for another shed.  As I’m no gardener, we’re OK with this, but an outdoor layout isn’t really an option, Keith.

[A new-old pannier for Bethesda Sidings]

What a beautiful runner - the way the loco glided on after uncoupling had me give a quiet “Wow!” when watching the video (esp. having noted the model is likely half a century old already).  An excellent interlude in my day.  Thank you, Keith.

[Laying track]

Hi there, an interesting blog post, thank you.  Just to reassure, track can be taken up and re-laid if needs be (the real railway does it).  It is usually best to give new track a thorough testing before progressing to any ballasting or scenic, just in case and odd problem arises, sometimes just with a particular piece of rolling stock, or in a certain direction of travel.

 

To answer one question: back in the day I think RTR when referring to track was called “Ready to Lay (RTL)”, though I’m not sure I’ve heard that term in a long time now.  Resin Structures have been called “Ready to Plant (RTP)”.

 

Hope that helps, Keith.

[Adjusting the track plan.]

Looks great - I tried a similar track plan for a GWR micro-layout BLT in OO a few years ago: it was fun to test run, but I didn’t get as far as scenics, I’m afraid.  In terms of switching the loco release to the front, the idea of the platform line becoming a siding reminded me somewhat of the arrangement at Hemyock (OK: there wasn’t a run-round by the platform, I’m just thinking there was a short siding at that end of the platform).  Don’t know if that helps, but will be interested to follow progress, Keith.

[You little Minx]

In terms of the model of caravan, it’s quite close to this one - a Bluebird Dauphin:

 

 

Mine does have a single, central rear window though, but other than that the styling looks similar, suggesting perhaps a different Bluebird model?  Just a thought, Keith.

 

(I have no idea if a Morris Minor would actually have the power to tow a caravan?)

 

[Ceteris Paribus: a lesson to remember]

Train length is one of the recurring themes in my musings.  My blog post above concentrated on passenger trains.  What about freight?  When I was looking at TT, I could comfortably get a 5-car freight train (with loco) onto a yard length of track:

 

 

Although I’ve stepped back up to H0 Scale, moving my era back in time to the 1980s (approx.) means I can get away with shorter wagons - so I can still fit a 5-car freight train and locomotive onto a yard of track.  I really like this short train:

 

 

 

(Stanchions need to be added to the flat stake wagon with the wood load).

 

This also compares favourable with the 44” needed for what was (operationally) a four-car freight train for my American HO, as that needed a caboose as well as power.  From what I’ve seen on film, German mainline freight trains (as in other Western European countries), tend to be kept shorter so they can run fast, so as not to hold-up to passenger trains.

 

 

Thanks, Keith.

 

[Ceteris Paribus: a lesson to remember]

8 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Neustadt an der Weinstrasse looks spectacular. And 3.4 kgs!  Clearly the kind of structure kit that is a whole project in itself. If you built nothing else for a year it would still be a satisfying achievement, I think. 

 

 Historically it looks like an interesting station too:

 

 

Thank you - a fascinating picture.  I believe the engine shed to the right is now a Railway Museum, giving the perfect excuse to display earlier rolling stock alongside more modern trains…if there’s room, Keith.

[2023 in Loftshire. A You Tube compilation film]

Hi there - first time I’ve seen this layout.  A very enjoyable video: great to see decent length trains given space to run: plenty of mainline action. Also a really good advert for how well made card kits can look great on a layout - the shot with the town scene in the background (around 8.40) was my favourite.  Particularly liked the Motorail train too.  Some nice details - such as smoke stains above the tracks on the over bridge, but the thought did cross my mind that I hope you like ballasting!  Looks like you have a lot of fun up in the loft, Keith.

[1. Faller 130594 Old Gate House Restaurant]

Just to add a thank you for the encouraging responses to this first build / post here.  It gives me every incentive to press straight on.  There will be a bit of a gap here though, as my next build is for my parallel HOn30 Narrow Gauge Project - a kit I picked up second hand for a rail served store (it has a loading dock at the back), Keith:

 

 

[1. Faller 130594 Old Gate House Restaurant]

4 hours ago, Vecchio said:

I suppose all Faller kits - except those of stations and everything close to the railway lines as well as kits which are showing a real building - are smaller than 1:87.  Which isn't a problem, as long as they somewhere further back. And I have the feeling their newer models are more scale than their old ones. I remember a 4 storey house on my first layout - it was more or less the same height than a scale 1-storey house...

Taking up @Vecchio’s observation, I posed this alternative shot tonight:

 

 

I’m no photographer, but this maybe shows how both buildings might appear together?  Just a thought, Keith.

[1. Faller 130594 Old Gate House Restaurant]

2 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Hi Keith, nice to see some German stuff developing. The kit looks quite nice, those paper inserts behind the windows work surprisingly well.

 

I've noticed that some structure kits from the continental European manufacturers have (or perhaps used to have) a relaxed approach to scale, tending towards being slightly smaller than they should be. Is that a problem that you have found?

Hi Mikkel, good point.  It’s definitely something to look out for, particularly some plastic kits still being made from older tooling (often now marketed as cheaper, entry-level ‘Hobby’ ranges).  Best advice seems to be to seek out photos of the building next to a train where possible, especially as some station kits do fall into this category of underscale items.
 

If I look at the two Faller kits in the header photo for this blog post, I think the brick built Schoenberg Station looks fine as a single storey wayside halt.  The restaurant / gate house kit however puts a second storey into the same sized building, so I think the upstairs would be rather cramped (particularly as the design points towards there being a raised ground level floor).  As the door is still big enough for a 1:87 person, it’s not so obviously underscale, but it would be fair to say it’s a bit small.

 

Ironically perhaps, it seems to me that some of the larger kits are less prone to this approach to scale, such as this model of the Swiss BLS station at Ostermundigen I made last year (it has appeared elsewhere on RMweb previously):

 

 

Note the Swiss coaches in the foreground are themselves made to a flexi scale length of 1:93.5, not 1:87, while the coaches behind are full length 1:87 models - something else to look out for of course.  The short coaches are still fully detailed.

Some kits (eg: a range made by Auhagen) are intentionally made to a compromise scale of 1:100.  They can either be slightly undersized for H0 or slightly over scale for TT, though to be fair they are correctly marketed as a 1:100 range.  These three line side huts on my H0e mini-layout are an example - you’ll notice there are no people in this yard scene for that reason.

 

Thanks for pointing that out - it is something to look out for, which I should have mentioned with this kit, Keith.

 

[When is good enough good enough? Improving the Bachmann 93xx]

“I don’t believe it!” - no sooner have I read and showed my appreciation for this helpful blog post last night than today I just happen to see on sale today a model I’ve been after for ages (a structure kit in my case).  Trouble is, I’ve been looking for an affordable example for so long that in the meantime I’ve already bought and built a slightly smaller substitute, plus bought another (not yet built) to fill the resulting gap in my plans.  So I can’t say I “need” the original I’ve now seen - as the others are certainly good enough.  If I only I’d not read this post yesterday…

 

(Admittedly, I am taking Barry’s point in a slightly different direction: in my case the prototype for the substitute structure kit I went for is not quite on the button, whereas the original would have been: hence I’m still using the “good enough” rule)

 

[When is good enough good enough? Improving the Bachmann 93xx]

Some interesting thoughts - well illustrated with some nice locos too.  An enjoyable read, thank you, Keith.

[Episode V: A New Year]

Thank you to @ian and @AndyB for your helpful suggestions, as always. After a visit to the first 2024 meeting of our local 009 Society Group this afternoon it was time for the first build of the year: kindly bought for me as a Christmas Gift by one of my daughters in the Family Secret Santa:

 

 

 

I’ve never actually owned one of these folding workbenches before, though I’ve long wanted one.  
 

In terms of other places to model, there are also several active Model Railway Clubs in our Area.  While the 009 Society Group doesn’t have a premises of its own, the Clubs do - which reminds me, I promised to visit one when I got the chance, so must set that up (the other one, which I have been shown round, has Club nights when I’m busy).  I get.a lot from belonging to the 009 Society, so ought to mention Club membership as relevant to this discussion topic, Keith.

 

[Learning from Wulfstan]

18 hours ago, AndyB said:

Hi Keith.

As ever a lot of good points to digest.

 

I think if you were to focus on narrow gauge you'd have the chance to do something really nice. Even if the space is more restricted. 

 

I've lost count of the minimal space narrow gauge layouts that have given me a "Wow" moment. These layouts seem to tell a story much better than their larger cousins. 

A 4' x 2' narrow gauge affair can  pack a punch. Whereas in standard gauge the same space would be very restricted. Long live the OO9 rabbit warren!!
 

To your thoughts on the pace of life and modelling. I read a thread recently...it may have been part of this blog??... where completing a layout left a huge gap in the person's life. They'd forgotten that each part of the build WAS the hobby and should be savoured. Not raced through to get to the finishing line.

 

That's the kind of thing we do at work. And hobbies aren't work. 

 

That's why on my own layout I've happily spent days trying to resolve one particular problem. Technically it was you that resolved it before I went mad. But you probably get my point.

 

When it comes to the shopping side of it we probably do a lot more of this than is healthy. And oftentimes purchases don't give long-term pleasure; a bit like a sugary snack. Pausing to think it through is more likely to give longer term benefit; a bit like an oat bar. 

 

And of course you've shown the value of turning some scrap material into a unique wagon load. For pennies! And I'd hazard that's given more pleasure than winning many an ebay auction.

 

Anyway, enough of my ramblings. Wishing you a joyful Christmas and a new start in 2024!

Andy

 

 

Thanks Andy, might the reference you mention have been this blog post by Lance Mindheim:

 

https://lancemindheim.com/2023/01/the-finished-layout-landmine/

 

I quoted and linked to his previous post, with this as the inviting "next post" title to go to at the bottom?  Definitely worth a read.  Thanks, Keith.

[When I were 'lad]

9 minutes ago, AndyB said:

Hi Keith. 

That's really good progress. 

What's the next step on those wagons? 

 

Some weathering maybe to tone the plastic down? 

 

Not being au fait with the US genre I searched for some images to find out what they would looking after being in service.

And found this grain train and this set of grain elevator photos.

 

A bit of dry brushing and powders would take them to the next level, I think.Lots of fun to be had there!

Thanks Andy, you’ll make a proper modeller out of me one day, I’m sure 😀.  They’re all packed away for now though, so I can get ready for work tomorrow, Keith.

[When I were 'lad]

Thank you @AndyB and @woodenhead - interesting and thoughtful responses.  I actually had a bit of free time this afternoon, so reduced my freight car kit stash by two:

 

 

 

I found a receipt in one of the boxes dated 1989 - for an American Hobby Store.  The grain elevator is unfinished.  The track is the rather nice Peco Code 70 American HO, ideal for this type of use.  Keith.

 

[1/8th Scale model of the revised layout]

Thanks for the information - very useful.  I’d agree that a 12” aperture is a bit tight and a few more inches should help, Keith.

[1/8th Scale model of the revised layout]

I’ve seen a few scale models of proposed layoutsver the years, but I don’t recall one where the baseboards (etc)  were so carefully included.  As has been noted, this has flagged up whether the proscenium arch will be too low.  Could I ask if you k ow what height you plan to display the layout at - if it’s eye level the arch may not need changing (or only a bit) as you’d be looking up at it, but if it’s for showing at a lower level then yes, I’d suggest increasing the height as taller folk  may not see much layout.  A very worthwhile exercise, thanks for sharing it here, Keith.

[How to not plan a model railway (part 4) - In which we find an unexpected ending...]

1 hour ago, AndyB said:

But there are some nice photographic backscenes available, e.g. 

ID Backscenes ID-P260A.

 

Either way I think a backscene would probably need to be removable. 

Andy

Hi Andy, thanks for this - and for pointing out the ID backscene (I’ve had a look and P260B might be closer to what I’m after). A removable backscene is definitely the kind of thing I’d be after: quite often mountains are in the background of the prototype videos I watch.  Thanks, Keith.