Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral
  1. The red used on 1990s Vauxhalls also faded badly, as on our Calibra at the time.
  2. Did the LNER use these cranes? If so, it seems odd that Bachmann has produced them in the liveries of the other companies, but not the LNER. If they did, I don't feel inclined to attempt repainting of such an expensive model into LNER livery, so might Bachmann bring one out in the future?
  3. OK - having digested the various postings, it is clear that the original CJF plan does not have much fidelity to prototypical railway practice, although I think it would look attractive in model terms. Even without much knowledge of real railway operations, I can see the potential for head-on collisions on the centre road is an obvious risk and therefore would be a problem on safety grounds. I'd assumed that signalling systems would be in place to prevent it, but on reflection, I suppose human error by drivers or signalmen could overcome these since, in the steam era, there was no ATC system except on the GWR. Thank you Stationmaster for the obvious amount of though you have put in, which you posted while I was in the middle of typing this. I don't quite follow everything you say about the revised layout of the points without having the layout in front of me, but I will give it some further thought. I can't upload a plan as I haven't got one - I have been mocking up the layout on the base board with the track sections I have already, and Peco's paper templates for the rest. If I can draw it out on paper, I will try and upload. I will definitely change the middle road to the main through line, but I was thinking right to left, retaining the point and single slip into the upper bay platforms as a link from the main line to the bays and the branch that I have added where the sidings previously accessed the turntable and coaling point. The lower of the three centre roads will then just become a platform loop for stopping trains, with a trailing exit back out on to the middle road. Although this platform is effectively an island, I hadn't intended the lower face of it to be an operating platform - I was thinking of these two lower loops as being part of the goods facilities. I will also add some trap points, if I can. I've now found a picture on line of a wide-to-gauge trap and while I don't think anyone makes one, it might be possible to build a non-working thing that would sort of look the part. I think what I will end up with is a layout that won't be properly prototypical, but not as glaringly wrong as the original version. Although the trains are 1930s LNER, this is just because they appeal to me and I am not trying to replicate any particular location or actual LNER operating practice. Regards. Lichfeldian
  4. Thanks for the responses. In reply to The Stationmaster, I had already substituted a single slip for the double slip accessing the bay platforms to the right. Would this be OK on a through line? I have also deleted the turntable and used the exit to it and the coaling stage from the bay platforms as the start of a single track branch. However, it is a tad disappointing to discover that the whole basis of the plan is non prototypical! I'd assumed that as it was produced by a railway modeller of significant note in his day, that it would be reasonably authentic. I must admit that trap points issue hadn't occurred to me and although Peco do produce them, I don't recall seeing them commonly fitted in model layouts, perhaps for reasons of space. Not being familiar with "real" railway practice, I don't know what a "wide to gauge" trap would look like. I had rather liked the plan as being a bit different and I'm reluctant to start yet again on another plan. I could easily replace the three way point with the successive right and left points, as on the original plan, although they would still be facing points of course. I do know that the old railway companies tried to avoid them, but again this seems to something frequently seen on model layouts. Otherwise, how could platform loops be laid out? What other alterations could do to make it more prototypical? What other use could the centre road have?
  5. I new to this forum and am at the start of creating a layout in my loft after years of dithering and false starts. As I have sufficient length and width for it, have roughed out a design based on Tresco in C J Freezer's PSL book of track plans. I know some regard these as rather old hat now, but the station layout in Tresco is a bit different from the usual, in that it has a central bi-directional loop line between the platform tracks, allowing freight trains or expresses to by-pass stopping trains. I have simplified the plan a little, particularly at the left hand end where (if you have access to the plan) there is a complicated collection of intersecting points and crossings that I couldn't seem to translate from the lines on the plan into actual Peco Streamline track pieces, without it becoming impossibly large. Another simplification I am considering, is replacing successive right and left hand points at the right hand entry to the station controlling the split from two to three through tracks, access to a slip point to the right and to a back platform loop to the left, with a three way point to save space. My question is: prototypically, would a three way point be permitted on a through main line, or were these only found in sidings, etc? A second question (which ought to be on the signalling queries part of this forum - sorry!), is how would this 2-3-2 track formation be signalled in the 1930s LNER steam era please? I'm guessing that a fully prototypical scheme would probably be too complex to create in the space available, but I would like to have some arrangement of signals (initially non-working) that would look reasonably true to life, if possible. Could anybody advise on either or both of these please? Regards and thanks. Lichfeldian
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.