[Hunters Lane WCML in N]

David,

 

I don't know any town planners, but I can't imagine any saying "nah, we won't build there, it will spoil the view of the railway"...

 

I think it's good to add some visual blocks in front of the track, it gives those realistic vantage points as you mentioned 'looking over the fence'; they can also be used to block views where you may not wish to see things that are unrealistic, but unavoidable in a model.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Medway East - 1990s Kent coast mainline in EM]

Hi Tim,

 

Great to see the layout's still around, many fond memories operating the layout over the years with Malcolm while I was a member of Crawley MRS - as you say it had a very interesting sequence that I never tierd of operating.

 

I look forward to seeing how the layout develops under new ownership.

 

All the best,

 

Mark

[Chandwell - N Gauge 1990s city viaduct]

Hi Michael,

 

I like the new rather unattractive, mundane, drab eyesore of a night club - it breaks up from the stylings of the other buildings adding variety, and also breaking the roof line. Would it work to build a slightly under-scale 'ultra-low relief' building for the opposite side of the street to avoid the sudden increase in visible sky? It might be a way to keep the variety of style in that location without it overly standing out.

 

Just a thought...

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[North End Road - WCML in N]

14 hours ago, spenc said:

Your layout coming along nicely did you sort your masts the taller one is ground mounted shorter one platform mounted the picture on my thread I put the ground one on the platform no wonder it looked tall I finally finished mine they are so fidderley but look alright.

 

Hi Dave/Spenc,

 

That's not strictly true, some of the gantries have the catenary wire running above the gantry, others have the catenary wire below the gantry; your photo has one of each by the look of it. Obviously it's the contact wire height that determines whether it should be ground or platform mounted. I'm no expert, but I have a set of Clive Mortimore's OHLE gantry drawings, and comparing these to "WCML 1980" Google search image results seems to indicate they were more specific to geographical locations. That said, around a station throat where there are anchors, tensioners etc there appears to be a mish-mash of gantry styles depending on the loads they are taking.

 

Clear as mud!

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Hunters Lane WCML in N]

David,

 

There looks to be quite a lot of open space either side of the ROC, how would it look with the warehouse built on a slimmer footprint so not to project too far from the backscene, and fill the ground between it and the railway with scrub/yard/car park?

 

Just a thought!

 

Mark

[Robertsfield]

Afternoon All, and Season's Greetings!

 

I have been continuing to work on both the layout scenic plan and the physical control panels.

 

The scenic plan is (I think) beginning to fall into place now and I have been focussing on avoiding the ‘clangers’ by ensuring the baseboard joins and backscene ‘junctions’ are disguised as best as possible.

 

I’m hoping the scene will give the feel of a small town serving agricultural and light manufacturing industries, but still have a slightly rural feel.

 

 

 

 

The control panels are progressing fairly well, I have assembled four of the facias with the fifth ready for adding the printed laminates to the aluminium sheet. My friend Rob Cottrell has kindly been working on the panel boxes and a transit/storage unit for them. I need to assemble the MERG units for the panels and then can start installing the wiring, although I’ve recently found that my order for the pushbutton switches was one fiddle yard panel short in quantity, another order to Mouser after payday methinks!

 

I think the panel wiring will be a slow laborious process, and I’ll have to be careful to fully plan and document all the connections to ensure the panels are identical within the types and make the programming as simple as possible later.

 

Below is one of the scenic panels, front and rear view:

 

 

 

And one of the fiddle yard panels, front and rear view:

 

 

 

 

 

This is the first time I've used aluminium for a control panel, previously always having worked with perspex. Unfortunately the laminated prints don't appear to correctly line up with the holes, I know a few of the holes ended up slightly offset, but not to the extent as seen with the facia on. What I don't understand is why there is such a big difference the expands across the length of the panel when the prints were all from the same document on the PC and the same printer.

 

Equally, the holes needed for the switches are not as big as advertised in the switch specs document, so there is a bit of wriggle room there.

 

Is it frustrating - yes, will it do the job - yes, so am I going to correct it - certainly not!

 

Probably won't be too much tangible progress over the next few weeks, I've only got a couple of days left to get ready for Christmas (tidying up etc - the shopping's all done!) before I go back to work - night shifts finishing Christmas morning! I've got the last three baseboards with wiring changes to complete so that I can then clear some space around the modelling desk before I attach the panels properly.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

 

 

[Chandwell - N Gauge 1990s city viaduct]

Michael,

 

Fantastic modelling!

 

What gets me is that I can 'hear' the water just looking at the photos. 

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[For those who like Aircraft pictures]

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

When I was learning to fly (admittedly nearly 40 years ago) a "go-around" was intentional whereas a "missed approach" was unintentional. "Touch-and-goes" were avoided at some aerodromes that regarded them as landings (brief) and charged a landing fee for each one.

 

Certainly at Shoreham when I trained for my PPL around 15 years ago a touch-and-go was about half the cost of a full-stop landing. Often you would call ATC on approach 'for the option' which would be either a full-stop or touch-and-go; no fees for approach only.

 

Both a missed approach and go around are the same thing, and involve a choice to do so - on the big stuff once the decision is made, the call is 'go around' and often includes a change of flap setting in the call (except for windshear) then the missed approach procedure is followed per the Jepp charts, or per ATC if they intervene. The choice can either be by the pilots (weather, instability etc), or an instruction by ATC due to runway obstruction or lack of separation.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[For those who like Aircraft pictures]

9 hours ago, J. S. Bach said:

In the U. S. Navy, we called them "touch-n-go". Real fun watching them shoot touch-n-goes off a carrier!

 

"Touch-n-go" involves rubber contacting tarmac; with missed approaches there's no contact with the ground. Missed approaches are more commonly known as "Go Arounds", but missed approach is the correct term.

 

I believe Newquay is quite popular for crosswind landing (or just approach in this case) training, a bit like Shannon.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Robertsfield]

Evening All,

 

I have had to hang up the soldering iron for a while, having trapped my thumb in the car boot the other day, I’m having to stick to tasks that can be done with 1½ hands!

 

I have redirected my focus towards the control panel (mechanical aspects) and layout scenic design.

 

The layout will be operated by five control panels across three operating positions – two scenic panels and three fiddle yard panels. Initially it sounds like overkill, but there is method to the madness to provide increased operational flexibility. The two panel types will be identical, so allow for redundancy, but will allow two ‘front of house’ operators to run trains over the whole layout without having to share a panel in front of the layout, while a third operator will be able to shuffle trains in the fiddle yard. This is the main reason for choosing a digital layout control system with pushbuttons; multiple panels can operate the same functions.

 

Below is the plan for the scenic control panel facia:

 

The buttons are all illuminated under specific conditions – yellow are for route setting, green for main signals (lit for ‘proceed’) and white for ground/shunt signals (lit for proceed). The black switches were originally to be non-illuminated for electromagnets, but since I’m changing to servo-operated ‘drop magnets’ I have opted for red illuminated buttons; these will be lit when the servos are not in the lowered position.

The last two buttons are the ‘initialise’ buttons, these are pressed simultaneously to get all the CBUS components into a datum status, or ‘start of day’ synchronised setting.

The fiddle yard panel is somewhat different – simpler in some respects, but more complex in others. The specific track layout at either end is irrelevant, only the destinations roads and crossovers are needed to be shown. This allows the panel to be reduced in length significantly. With ten parallel roads each over 9-foot-long, and with minimal gaps between them, I have opted to use block detection. Rather than having a panel lit up like a sea of red showing occupied blocks, I will instead inverse the logic and use green LEDs to highlight the vacant blocks, the panel design can be seen below:

 

The facias were drawn-up in Xara and will be printed, then laminated and will overlay a sheet of aluminium before fitting the switches and LEDs. I have started by printing a drill guide which will allow me to centre-pop all the holes before piloting and step-drilling to the required sizes:

 

My good friend who built the subframes is constructing the control panel boxes for me.

 

I have also started working on the scenic plan for the layout. I have had a rough idea in mind but thought it about time to start putting some detail into the plans. As I have been doing for my ‘modern’ planned layout Bridgtown, I have imported the Templot file into Xara to draw up the scenic plan. So far, the imported track components have been tidied up; some 20000 plus parts reduced to around 3000 parts, and I have added the third rail. I have also started on a few scenic details, such as board crossings, a few buildings roughly placed and a bit of greenery:

 

The goods shed is from Aldershot, the footprint re-drawn in Xara from some drawings purchased from the Network Rail Media store.

I am looking to make use of the Scalescenes printed kits and have been working on how best I can use them to block views of the roads disappearing into the backscene. It needs some more refinement, but I should get there. Behind the station will likely be house backs and gardens, maybe an electrical sub-station for supplying the third rail. The signal box, which I have started building, is a cut-down ‘Arch Laser’ LSWR type 4 box kit.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Robertsfield]

Evening All,

 

The wiring modifications continue apace, with a further two baseboards almost complete.

 

This leaves me with the last two baseboards to modify, then any final minor tasks to complete across the layout before the baseboard electrics get 'signed off'.

Baseboards 1 and 8 were the last two paired boards to be worked on and the below images show the progress of baseboard 1:

 

 

The above image shows the baseboard prior to modification, with the CBUS ACC8 output module, Quad Relay Board, SERVO4 and interface board, all of which were removed as part of the mod programme. The Electromagnets were also to be removed. The CAN bus wiring was also to be replaced with ethernet cable to incorporate an additional power supply for the MERG units.

 

 

 

 

Cable ties were cut and the redundant components detached from the board, the mess begins!

 

 

 

 

The MERG DCC 'District Cutout' and CBUS CANMIO are installed, new tag strips to alter the existing 12VDC supply and DCC bus are also in place.

 

 

 

 

The last image during testing; the CANMIO has been added to the CBUS 'network' in the FCU which is MERG's programme for setting up the CBUS components. Track power has been applied and the DCO overload protection tested. Only the uncoupling magnet assemblies remain to be constructed, signal servos fitted (in the future) and additional component labels to be added.

 

That leaves me with baseboards 2 and 7 yet to modify, and baseboard 2 is the most complex, but hopefully the one to benefit the most from the reduced number of components.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

 

 

[Robertsfield]

Evening All,

 

Yet again, it’s been another long while since my last update, and for the most part I’ve not done much on the layouts. With all the recent goings on I’ve been in and out of Furlough, and spending most of my time off landscaping the garden or renovating my Brother’s flat.

 

I have recently been helping on a friend’s new 7mm scale layout getting the electrics up running with MERG CBUS and DCC equipment. That is now operable and has spurred me on to progressing my own projects. I have finally managed to get my CBUS equipment working as I intended, although has not been straightforward.

 

Sometime ago I built a small test board to operate two servos from a MERG CANMIO input/output module and receive two inputs from occupancy detectors built to a MERG ‘Pocket Money Project’ design. I couldn’t get the inputs working from the occupancy detectors, the CANMIO not generating any messages on the CAN bus either from track occupancy, or by bypassing with a shorting link on the detector output/CANMIO input. After posting a question on the MERG forum the fix came about by reloading the firmware to the PIC (‘chip’) and then configuring all the inputs channels to outputs, then reverting to inputs. This allowed the bypass link to work, but still nothing from the occupancy detectors. I subsequently found a wire link missing from the detector boards and after checking my working drawing it transpired, I had omitted the link from my drawing. The problem then was that I had assembled around thirty of these dual-detector boards to the incorrect drawing! I am now in the process of modifying these boards and reinstalling them to the fiddle yard baseboards.

 

In addition to the above task I am also making some other changes to the electrics; myself and two other friends are all building layouts that use MERG CBUS and DCC control equipment, which means that we can share equipment for backup purposes. This of course requires a set of standards to ensure compatibility. During the initial planning discussions and research on the MERG website the first two layouts were not configured the same. I am now in the process of revising the CBUS connections to match those of the second layout, the third layout already having been wired matching the second. I am also adding a separate 12V DC supply for the MERG equipment whilst retaining the existing 12V DC supply for the servos and larger loads.

 

I am pleased with how the CANMIOs are working and will take the opportunity to free up some space under the scenic baseboards by switching the control equipment and uncoupling devices. For example, on baseboard 2 (the centre scenic board) I have 3x CANACC8 8 channel output boards, driving 4x SERVO4 boards via optocoupler interface boards, and also driving two quad relay boards. With all the turnout/signal servos and uncoupling magnets this does not leave much real estate spare and the scenic boards also need District CutOuts (DCOs) installing. I will be removing the existing control equipment and replacing with CANMIOs, where two boards will replace 11 existing boards. On top of this I will be removing the electromagnets and associated relay boards and use servo-driven drop magnets which are a direct drive from the CANMIOs which will save even more space.

 

So far, I have completed two baseboard conversions, and two nearly completed. I have also produced a test control panel in JMRI show below, which allows me to get all the CBUS configuration completed and satisfactorily tested before I build physical control panels.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Hobb's Bridge Goods N Scale (Billy Bookcase Layout)]

10 hours ago, MarshLane said:

 

 

Mark,

Butting in on Duncan's thread, but I like that idea a lot.  Nice and neat, small and unobtrusive.  That requires some further investigation   Thanks for posting the pictures - I presume X and Y are cutting points.  I like that the locos only have the loop which would really help the visual aspect.

 

Rich

 

Hi Rich,

 

Yes, 'X' and 'Y' are cutting lines, but looking at the diagram now it looks like the 'X' line passes right across the etch, which is incorrect.

 

I've just checked the notes again, and 'X' and 'Y' are optional cut lines, 'Y' for if additional length is required; 'Y' would also need an increased counter-balance.

 

This design will have been seen in operation at exhibition on 7mm layouts such as CMRS' 'Rothern Bridge' and possibly its predecessor 'Tilgate', and more recently on 'Ellis Road', 'Harlyn Road' and 'Newhurst' (under their previous respective ownership), and currently on 'Harlyn Pier'.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Hobb's Bridge Goods N Scale (Billy Bookcase Layout)]

On 13/07/2020 at 09:14, Duncan. said:

Hi Mark,

Can you sketch that for me?

 

Hi Duncan,

 

Apologies for the delay, couldn't find the files on my PC so had to get the info from a friend:

 

 

Hope that helps!

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Hobb's Bridge Goods N Scale (Billy Bookcase Layout)]

Duncan,

 

I used to be a member of the Crawley Club, where on their 7mm layout they use the 4mm S&W couplings for improved appearance. They don't construct them 'as is', but cut the 'paddle' from the hook and solder the hook to brass wire. The wire is then bent 90°, passed through some brass tube, then bent back 90° and pointing downwards slightly with a counter balance added to the last length or wire. The brass tube is then soldered to a small piece of brass angle, strip or sheet, which is then glued to the rolling stock. Locomotives are only fitted with a wire loop.

 

It worked very reliably once all set to the correct height and offset. Unfortunately 2mm is the smallest coupling, so no downsizing available for us!

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Shirebrook - N Gauge 1980's era layout.]

On 28/06/2020 at 15:37, Duncan. said:

I designed and manufactured my own portal structures (based on the structures south of Crewe) for inclusion in a possible layout, (In fact some were used on Horsely Fields)

 

Hi Duncan,

 

Since discovering your Shirebrook thread, I often wondered if you were the originator of the StatesmaN OHLE portals - I picked up some kits from you at Warley some years ago, along with a RES Class 86 and an HST chassis, although I think the latter might have been a CJM product. The portals will be used on Bridgtown (eventually!).

 

Will you be building 'Any Place Junction' in the four formats, rotating similarly to Outwell Village Depot ?

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Scratch-built card and styrene structures (based on real buildings around London Bridge)]

Grahame,

 

How about scaffolding as ground clutter and/or van/lorry loads ready to be unloaded and assembled?

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Twisty Test Track]

41 minutes ago, AireValley1962 said:

That looks excellent, Mark! That 50 seems like a pretty powerful loco. 

 

Thanks William,

 

The Class 50 has been my 'go to' loco since starting this project, it has been very capable of hauling my Centreline Products rail cleaner, dragging the cloth-wrapped brass roller around without hassle.

 

I tried running in my A1 'Tornado', which as a prototype was actually built too late for my intended period on Bridgtown, but looks nice nonetheless; it couldn't get up the incline in either direction though!

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Twisty Test Track]

Morning All,

 

Got the 'green & furry' pretty much finished now, might have to do a bit more here and there later, but it'll do for now. I still need to paint the rail sides, but decided to do a bit of running instead.

 

I gave some loco's their first run-in having sat in their boxes since new - first up was a Class 4MT 2-6-4 and another 'N' Class:

 

 

 

After a few more running in sessions for Robertsfield stock I decided to give some of my Bridgtown stock a run, namely the Pendolino and my Class 50 hauled "Toothpaste Tourer" charter set:

 

 

 

The haulage capability between the locos is astonishing, the 4MT could hardly pull two coaches up the gradient, yet the Class 50 managed nine without too much wheel slip.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Twisty Test Track]

2 hours ago, AireValley1962 said:

Looking very nice! Got to get some trains on it now, mate!

 

Hi William,

 

One more bit to patch up, then give the track a good clean, but after that...

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Twisty Test Track]

Afternoon All,

 

My delivery from WWS arrived yesterday, so finished giving the layout a basic covering.

 

The layout's been relegated back into the office, so it's mostly artificial lighting now:

 

 

 

 

One thing I have learnt from this is that if you mask the track, it is very easy to get carried away with the static grass and you soon lose the edge of the tape. I ended up with some nice looking scenics, that then got 'cut off' when the tape was removed. I think in future I will either just not bother with the tape, and hoover up after the first base coat, or just be careful not to get too much on the tape.

 

I've now got some additional patching up to do than expected along the track edges, plus around the tunnel mouths with some coarse foliage.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

 

 

[Twisty Test Track]

2 hours ago, shanks522 said:

Looking really good Mark, you definitely putting me to shame, I’ve managed absolutely nothing on mine. 
 

graham. 

 

Graham,

 

It's the most 'proper' modelling I've done in a couple of years! I've been fortunate enough to have a bit of space to leave it between bouts of working, and fitting those in between other jobs around the house.

 

I'm back to work on 4th June until the end of the month whenever the last shift finishes (haven't looked that far ahead yet!), then back on furlough again for July. I'm trying to get it presentable before returning to work.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Twisty Test Track]

A bit more work done after cleaning the oven this morning (lovely job!) while I have a cuppa.

 

I've now pretty much run out of the layering spray, fortunately I placed an order for a couple more cans, so hopefully will be here in a couple of days.

 

 

I'm actually quite pleased with it so far, although the 'clockwise' tunnel mouth does look like it's just been to the barbers for some kind of neat punk hairstyle in green with purple highlights:

 

 

 

The Dullcote seems to have left a grey powdery finish to the tunnel mouths, which I think I've seen previously and resolved with Johnsons Klear varnish to bring the colour back up; alas not on this occasion. I'll add some Woodlands foliage to cover the worst of it.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

[Twisty Test Track]

Morning All,

 

Between tasks around the house, I have been working on the test track here and there; the terrain around the tunnel mouths was 'made good':

 

 

Unfortunately, I put too much water in the plaster powder, which of course was the last of the box so ended up applying it as a plaster/paint/PVA slurry again.

 

This then was all given another coat of neat paint to darken it up, and the contour board/fascia was given a coat of satin black:

 

 

 

I found my can of sleeper grime, so gave the track a spray - it looks a bit brown now so I'll try giving it a gentle brushing to bring some of the grey back. I seem to have reapplied masking tape to the track before any photos were taken of the sprayed track.

 

I've been wanting to try out some of the WWS materials and tools that I've had for a long while, so started adding some static grass; photos taken this morning with the sunlight coming in through the window, rather than last night's artificial light:

 

 

 

I was a bit concerned at first as the base layer didn't adhere too well, and the layering spray seemed to just blow it in to clumps. That's not so much a bad thing if you want to create clumps, but not great if you want a tidier looking field or lawn.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens when I vacuum the area, my concern is that not much will be left! In the least, I'm probably going to have to patch up areas alongside the cess.

 

I have some purple/lavender scatter material somewhere that I will dig out and sprinkle over some of the coarser patches; I do wonder if it is going to look a bit more suitable for 4mm/7mm scale rather than 2mm though. I'll also add some heavier growth around the tops of the tunnel mouths.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

 

[Twisty Test Track]

Evening All,

 

I've been working on the Scalescenes tunnel mouths, which are now installed, but have just realised still need varnishing. I'll let the glue dry overnight, vacuum the plaster/foam debris, then give them a couple of coats of Dullcote.

 

The scenic form has needed a fair bit of chopping back to get the tunnel mouths to fit. I've glued some of the foam/plaster to back-fill some of the larger gaps, then this will all need making good with fresh plaster. I'm sure scenically the landscape is very contrived, but given the nature of the layout and track plan I don't see it being a real issue.

 

Here's the latest photos:

 

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

Mark