DK123GWR

An excuse rather than a criticism?

I assume that's filed under unfunny replies.

Are meetings with Peco sales reps buy a-point-ment?

There's a bit too much here to reply to point by point so I've tried to pick out the main themes: 1) Goods shedaccess - I've removed the siding immediately above the goods shed, and moved the other two closer together to create a suitable space. 2) The entrance from the west - I agree, it just didn't look right as it was. I've now redrawn it in a straighter form. Since the line will now leave the main board at an angle, the start of the ST curve can be further back. It also means that I gain space to address: 3) It's too cramped - As well as removing the siding above the goods shed, I've now been able to fan out the sidings in the lower left a little more, hopefully making it look a bit more natural. 4) Traps - aren't shown because they'll be dummies made from spare bits of rail. I have also added labels, based on the prototype, for some of the sidings.

The thought had occurred but I dismissed it until you posted. It turns out I actually have room for the whole thing if I lose two sidings from the south (which is the top of your plan). Given that the interesting bit to operate will be the goods yard, I don't mind the ugly, curved, off-scene 'platforms' required to fit it into my room. The scenic section and fiddle yard will each be on two boards, with one for each of the curves (and a section cut out of the eastern yard board to accomodate it. Depicted in the centre is a rough sketch of a station extension which could be added if the layout were exhibited (which is likely to happen at some point). I've started to pass this plan around other stakeholders for feedback now

The passenger station needs to be on the main lines, so platforms and pointwork need to fit into that length. On the left I could gain 610mm if I only needed a single track curve at the other end (otherwise slightly less) providing that the join could still be within 1220mm of both ends (so that the scenic section can be in two pieces). There is barely any room to play with on the right because of a door.

A 180 degree set-track curve will come off of each end to connect to the FY. The headshunt will run parallel to one of these. The layout can't be made longer because these curves need to fit into the room. I won't make it deeper because it's deep enough, I don't want to take up too much space, and that's the depth of a piece of wood, so its just a convenient cut off.

For clarity, which are you calling the down line (I'm assuming the lower one, heading left, but I should have set that convention by labelling the diagrams). And how does this change remove any facing points? Unless I'm missing something (which is very much possible) there was one, which allowed trains in the Up platform to access either the headshunt or the mainline, and now there is one, allowing trains from mainline (at the other end) to enter either the Up platform or the yard. EDIT: I've also lost the separate headshunt with this change, so can't shunt while leaving a train running around, which I like to do when operating on my own.

I am planning a GWR through station with a scenic section of 1830mmx610mm (roughly 6ftx2ft). I am planning for a single line, two platforms, and a goods yard, and aiming for a small-medium town in Wiltshire feel. The main aim is to make it interesting to operate (which means shunting and having to think about it, preferably with the option to run a train through the station at the same time). Within the space, and secondary to the 'interesting to operate' requirement, I would also like the layout to be as credible as possible. One problem posed by this is that the goods yards at stations I have looked at are all offest from the station itself, while the space constraint here requires them to be alongside each other. Additionally, it seems that there are often two access points to the yard, usually one where most of the sidings converge and one on the other side of the goods shed. I cannot add a second access without losing a lot of potential platform on one side, so my plans so far have only featured one.* There must be a baseboard join within 1220mm of both ends. This will be a straight line and must be clear of points, ideally with the tracks crossing over it as straight as possible. I have a couple of plans that I would invite feedback on, but it would also be good to hear about prototypes whose basic layout (or elements from it) might fit my constraints. Previously, I've found looking at a specific protoype and trying to capture the general arrangement (with changes to siding lengths, numbers, and purpose where needed) is a reasonably good way of designing a layout, so its a route I'd happily go down again. Plan A: This was is an evolution of an initial sketch made while I was working out what sort of layout I wanted but before conducting much research. The top line leaving the scene on the right hand side is for a headshunt, the other lines leaving are the running line. The idea at the moment is: A1: refuge/sorting siding A2: mileage/coal siding A3: platform (above, also serving A4) with end loading dock A4: Platform (below, also serving A3) A5: Cattle dock (above) Plan B: The goods yard here is based on the yard at the western end of Devizes (search for 'Station Road, Devizes' on this site to see old OS maps - this is based on the 2nd and 3rd editions). The lines leaving the scene are as per plan A. B5 is clearly a cattle dock with end loading on the prototype and B4 could be used as the headshunt for this. There is also another kickback siding from B4 in the 3rd edition map, possibly with a platform. I haven't included it in this version of the plan, but might do in future versions. The other lines at Devizes are all ground level, with one served by a crane (if I were to install one it would have to be on B2). B3 would likely be a mileage/coal siding, with B1 used to facilitate shunting. *Naturally, writing down the problem led to immediately realising the obvious solution, so a quick re-work of B led to: Plan C: This is definitely not going to be the best layout for a two-access yard as its just a retrofit to the previous design. I'll do a proper plan with two access points when I get the chance (and it isn't so late). This approach loses more length from the (initially longer) bottom platform than from the top platform (as would be the case if the turnout to access the yard were inside the one dividing the platforms). I'm still not sure that I'd go for it over the slightly longer platforms but I'll make sure to give it a fair hearing by developing a few ideas first.

'Second-hand' is potentially inaccurate of course - it seems strange to call something that's changed hands five or six times 'second hand'. 'Pre-owned' doesn't make any such judgements about how many former owners there have been. I suspect that 'pre-loved' is merely intended as better marketing. It is meant to imply that it is good enough to be loved. A 'pre-owned' item might have been sold because the owner hated the useless pile of [insert favourite words here]. A 'used' item might be worn down. The seller does seem to have put a fair bit of work into writing a positive description, listing features and using lots of adverbs, so it makes sense that they'd look for a term with positive connotations.

https://www.devboats.co.uk/gwdrawings/fictitious.php @JimC drew one on this page, commenting: He also draws a 4-6-2T based on a Manor. I have started a model of a similar loco based on a Bachmann Manor and Airfix Prairie (with a Hornby Grange chassis). SInce then I have sanded off the BR numberplate and a other few minor bits. I've also acquired a 3D printer, and because I don't really like my effort of extending the Airfix tanks, I'll replace them with printed ones when I'm home for the summer. Having seen both in 00 gauge (no pictures of the two together though) the 71xx is a lot more imposing than the large prairie.

Perhaps you'll warm to geothermal power?

If you think that's good, you'll be blown away by wind power.

Less often than a toad!

Just a vastly costly tunnel (and associated vastly costly stations) in the very centre of London then? No individual station in Central London would have the TFL connections to north and south London available at Euston (Northern, Victoria, Met, Watford DC lines) found at Euston, and from Euston you can reach every Zone 1 National Rail station except Marylebone and City Thameslink on a single train. TCR for example would gain the missing two, but lose out on Kings Cross, St Pancas, Old Street, the OSI between Tower Hill and Fenchurch Street, London Bridge, Cannon Street, Blackfriars, Elephant & Castle, Vauxhall, and Victoria. It might be better for visits to central London, but many people living in London going north and those making onward connections (especially from the southeast) Euston provides the better option. Linking HS1 to HS2, altering passport checks (or following most of Europe and getting rid of them), and enabling direct trains to France would seem a sensible idea. Unfortunately, common sense and UK border policy go together like the north pole of a neodymium magnet and the north pole of another nemdymium magnet. Since you can't go to France (if you could it might be worth greater consideration), you would need to turn the trains somewhere. There probably isn't capacity on existing lines (and at any rate using existing lines would expose HS2 to delays on other lines in Kent) so you would need a new line to wherever it is you're going. Then you need to build a new station to turn around 18tph (or upgrade several stations, while also devising ways to get the trains to them, which all increases the complexity of the timetable and risk of delays). You would also need more new trains because of the time stock spends in Kent, where it isn't really adding value to existing services for the vast majority of passengers.

No, I believe this is the government's latest effort to curb protest around Westminster.

I'm quite sure I've never seen a Rivet Counter Detector Van in the real world...

Anything with job security and decent pay is a prized career. Exams just filter for a particular thinking style, and that's influenced mostly by education. As in politics, going to a private school then Oxbridge, and meeting the right sorts of people along the way, matters far more than anything else when it comes to career opportunities at the top of the Civil Service. It always has. How much do you suppose the average Oxford Union officer knows about running a railway?

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/independent-evaluation-office/ieo-report-january-2021/ieo-evaluation-of-the-bank-of-englands-approach-to-quantitative-easing My reading of this analysis is that since 2012 net profits are paid to the treasury. The Asset Purchase Facility (the Bank of England's QE program) do receive coupon payments and use these to fund their operations. Net profits would be paid to the treasury, who also cover net losses. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/asset-purchase-facility/2022/afp-annual-report-2022.pdf Page 23 of this document shows that the treasury paid around £40bn in 2021 and £30bn in 2022 in order to cover the APF's losses. Looking back over previous reports, this is unusual. In 2017 for instance, the APF paid £50bn to the Treasury.

Governments (at least in wealthy countries) are normally able to borrow at lower interest rates than private sector agents. The risk of a company defaulting on its debt is much higher, so investors will demand compensation in the form of higher interest rates. The government issues bonds which are bought mostly by large financial institutions, particularly those which need to make relatively safe investments, such as banks and insurance companies. The Bank of England has also acquired a very large share of UK debt since the financial crisis through its quantitative easing program.

A good thing it's on this page of this thread then!

When she dated you did she use carbon dating, or just an estimate based on the surrounding rocks?

What about: https://www.steam-museum.org.uk/ ? And don't forget that people come all the way from Russia to visit Salisbury Cathedral, famous across the world for its 123-metre spire and pioneering clock.

I can't find the suggestion that English should be 'deprecated' on a skim read. What it does say is this: Which, given the context of Oxfam's role as an English organisation which supports people in former British colonies, it seems quite important to acknowledge. If not because of any political-philosophical arguments (though the arguments are forceful) then at least because of the practical reality that recognising past mistakes and working to correct them is essential for building trust and mutual respect in human relationships. I generally find that trust and mutual respect make for a far more pleasant environment and far more productive work. But perhaps we should return to jokes? The southern terminus of the Bakerloo line is to be rebuilt with 6 platforms, an underground zoo, a fortified station building, and step-free access to platform level provided via water slides. It is also to be renamed 'White Elephant & Castle'.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64454173 If anyone wants to buy some S Stock, perhaps try digging around in the loft for Mr Blobby...