LAYOUT SPECIAL: BRM SEPTEMBER + FREE DVD

[SteveCole]

Hi all,

 

Welcome to BRM’s hugely popular ‘Layout Special’ – a 148-page magazine and free DVD totally dedicated to celebrating quality model railways! You’ll be able to enjoy 13 layouts – 10 in the magazine plus a further 3 on the DVD – in a variety of scales and gauges.

 

Whilst the magazine is a celebration of modelling excellence, it also includes a number of new product reviews from the likes of Graham Farish, DCCconcepts and Bachmann.

 

This September issue is available to download as a Digital Edition NOW! The printed version goes on-sale in shops around the UK on Thursday, August 18 but can be purchased from our website now!

 

The cheapest way to enjoy BRM is to subscribe. Click here to view our latest offers. If you’d like a Free Modelling Lamp, click here to see a very special subscription offer.

 

Below is a run-down on what’s inside this month’s magazine.

 

The BRM Team        

 

 

10 Quality Model Railways

·         Tamerig – British Railways 1948-60 – OO gauge

·         Seaford – British Rail 1975-82 – OO gauge

·         Ben Moor Foot Peat Railway – Lincolnshire 1970s – 016.5 gauge

·         Drewry Lane – BR Southern Region 1960s – OO gauge

·         Water Street Sidings – North Eastern Railway 1910 – O gauge

·         Shirebrook – BR Eastern Region 1980s – N gauge

·         Bacup Engine Shed – Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway 1910 – OO gauge

·         Abbots Barton – Southern Region 1960s – OO gauge

·         Kineton – Project Layout – N gauge

·         Melbridge Dock – BR 1948-68 – OO gauge

                                 

Goods Inwards – Product News & Reviews

·         The latest news from the world of model railways

·         6 Book Reviews

·         Reviewed: Graham Farish DCC Sound Class 108

·         Reviewed: DCCconcepts ‘Legacy’ OO Bullhead Track

·         Reviewed: chassis upgrade – Bachmann Ivatt 2MT 2-6-2T

·         Reviewed: Bachmann/TMC ‘Covhop’ Sugar Hoppers

 

What’s on this month’s FREE DVD?

·         Layout 1: Hazelbank – OO gauge

·         Layout 2: Newcastle on the Water – N gauge

·         Layout 3: Redford Junction – TT gauge

 

Click here to download the Digital Edition

 

[chrisf]

My printed copy arrived this morning.  The text of Abbots Barton looked very familiar.  Then I remembered - it is also in the copy of Hornby Magazine that I bought yesterday.

 

Chris

[boody227]

The bacup layout says see more on the groups blog on here, anybody got a link for the blog? I can't seem to find it.

Cheers. Luke

[Del]

I downloaded this last night, and like the idea of the Layout Special, but at least three articles don't have a trackplan, which in my mind is a major omission when it comes to layouts.

[Phil Parker]

I downloaded this last night, and like the idea of the Layout Special, but at least three articles don't have a trackplan, which in my mind is a major omission when it comes to layouts.

 

Hold on, is this the MRJ thread? ;-)

 

I can help with Melbridge Dock - there's a plan on my website: http://www.pagenumberone.co.uk/layouts/dock/index.htm (Yes I know it's clunky, I'll re-do it one day...) The original was drawn a few decades ago so won't be on file nowadays.

[gwrrob]

My printed copy arrived this morning.  The text of Abbots Barton looked very familiar.  Then I remembered - it is also in the copy of Hornby Magazine that I bought yesterday.

 

Chris

That's something I'm definitely trying avoid with my layouts appearance in said magazines. Hopefully all will be fine.

[Andrew P]

That's something I'm definitely trying avoid with my layouts appearance in said magazines. Hopefully all will be fine.

I've always done completely new re writes for my Layouts in different mags, it's harder as how you ballast can only be said a couple of ways for example.

[grahame]

I've always done completely new re writes for my Layouts in different mags, it's harder as how you ballast can only be said a couple of ways for example.

Yep, in the past I produced different write ups for different magazines for my layouts.

 

But rather than simply re-hash the standard layout article using different words, I tried to take a different approach to each. For example one was the usual blow by blow description of how it was build, another was about the inspiration and what I was planning to achieve (atmosphere, realism, operation, etc) while another looked at specific elements of the layout, the research needed to model them and the issues of the scale.

 

That saves the need to try and explain how the ballasting was carried out three times.

 

G

[Andrew P]

Yep, in the past I produced different write ups for different magazines for my layouts.

 

But rather than simply re-hash the standard layout article using different words, I tried to take a different approach to each. For example one was the usual blow by blow description of how it was build, another was about the inspiration and what I was planning to achieve (atmosphere, realism, operation, etc) while another looked at specific elements of the layout, the research needed to model them and the issues of the scale.

 

That saves the need to try and explain how the ballasting was carried out three times.

 

G

Also different mags have a different type of readership which can make any re write more interesting.

[rue_d_etropal]

I prefer to only send to one magazine at a time. It is not the first time this has happened and I have commented on it before. Nothing wrong when there is a gap of a year or so, but would still expect different photos and articles.

There may be different readers for different magazines, but duplicate articles reduce variety, and it is better to have a wider range of different layouts than a small range with duplicates. Personally I don't think it is professional, but difficult to stop when people send same9or very similar) articles to more than one magazine. Also not sure about copyright on photos, as I have always assumed magazines had some of the rights. I always take 3 photos at a time, virtually the same, so I can keep one, send one to magazine and use one online. Quite often one photo has to be scrapped.

[SteveCole]

The 'Layout Special' goes on-sale tomorrow!

[SteveCole]

Here are some pictures of Tamerig (OO) which appears in BRM September, our annual 'Layout Special'.

 

 

[phil_sutters]

A message from the non-fictional town of Seaford. Currently our station looks like this most of the time during the week, thanks to Southern's emergency timetable.

 

Why do people choose names that bear no relationship to the area they are modelling, as with Dulwich Vale - a country station - when the only Dulwich I can find is where I used to live in inner London? That Dulwich has three stations of its own.

Why do people develop a model station almost beyond recognition - like Newhaven Harbour - and yet retain the original name?

Why do people give their layout a name when it bears absolutely no similarity to the existing location? It's not as if one can't check if the name is already in use by a real place. 

This is what our track plan looks like! You might not be inspired by it, but don't pinch our name. In normal times it is served by 3-car 313s from Brighton. 8-car 377s are used when Brighton & Hove Albion are playing at home.

But we did have some excitement in 2014 when we had two steam specials to mark the branch's 150th birthday. Oliver Cromwell and 44932 provided the steam power.

There is a nice working model of Seaford station, back in the inter-war years, I think, in our local museum. So if I want to see the genuine article I can dive down into the Martello tower on the seafront, the home of the Seaford Museum.

[graham.davison]

What has happened to the monthly trackplan archive? I assumed last month that it was just omitted through lack of space, but no archive this month either. Has it been permanently discontinued?  Haven't found any mention in the editorials.

Or is it temporarily on hold as part of a cunning plan to encourage me to buy the '60 Trackplans Volume 2' and thus keep getting my regular fix.  If so I have to admit that it worked!

[Guest 40-something]

 

Why do people choose names that bear no relationship to the area they are modelling, as with Dulwich Vale - a country station - when the only Dulwich I can find is where I used to live in inner London? That Dulwich has three stations of its own.

Why do people develop a model station almost beyond recognition - like Newhaven Harbour - and yet retain the original name?

Why do people give their layout a name when it bears absolutely no similarity to the existing location? It's not as if one can't check if the name is already in use by a real place. 

This is what our track plan looks like! You might not be inspired by it, but don't pinch our name.

Why not?  Place names generally relate to ancient settlements or geographical markers.  There are a good number of duplicated place names in Britain.  Gillingham for instance.  One in Kent and one in Dorset.

 

The name Dulwich means the meadow (wich) where the dill (dul) flower grows.  This could be anywhere in the English speaking world.  Even the name Seaford (crossing area of a waterway, next to the sea) can be used anywhere in Britain where the same geographical features exist.  

 

Folk develop a model station from what it is to a) imagine what it could be like if traffic flows where different and b) to make it more interesting to operate

[phil_sutters]

Why not?  Place names generally relate to ancient settlements or geographical markers.  There are a good number of duplicated place names in Britain.  Gillingham for instance.  One in Kent and one in Dorset.

 

The name Dulwich means the meadow (wich) where the dill (dul) flower grows.  This could be anywhere in the English speaking world.  Even the name Seaford (crossing area of a waterway, next to the sea) can be used anywhere in Britain where the same geographical features exist.  

 

Folk develop a model station from what it is to a) imagine what it could be like if traffic flows where different and b) to make it more interesting to operate

I suppose it is a sense of disappointment that, having anticipated finding a model of something one knows about, the model is of something completely or substantially different. Perhaps I should have left the magazines on the shelf, having had a sneaky look inside!

[61661]

What has happened to the monthly trackplan archive? I assumed last month that it was just omitted through lack of space, but no archive this month either. Has it been permanently discontinued?  Haven't found any mention in the editorials.

Or is it temporarily on hold as part of a cunning plan to encourage me to buy the '60 Trackplans Volume 2' and thus keep getting my regular fix.  If so I have to admit that it worked!

Thanks for mentioning this. The Trackplan Archive has been temporarily left out as we needed the space for more articles in the August, September and October issues. However, I would like to take this opportunity to gather a little feedback about what people think of it. Since the archive was introduced at the start of 2016, I/we haven't received a single message or email for/against it, or suggesting any potential layouts for inclusion. Bearing in mind that railway modellers aren't shy about expressing their opinions on any given subject, especially magazine content(!), we're very surprised that nothing has been said either way.

Because the trackplans bookazines have been such a runaway success, and we know how much people like the plans, we thought it would be a popular addition to BRM. But we'd like to know for sure how much you value it and if anyone is collecting the plans as suggested? All constructive feedback is appreciated!

 

Ben

[SteveCole]

**BEN MORE FOOT PEAT RAILWAY**
Industrial railways come in all shapes and sizes, as this narrow gauge peat railway demonstrates in BRM September. This month's magazine is our popular 'Layout Special' and is on-sale now! It includes 10 model railways plus a further 3 on the free DVD! Find out more here.

 

 

[flyingsignalman]

Regarding the Trackplan Archive I would like to see some plans from early issues of BRM, not just recent ones.

[graham.davison]

Thanks for mentioning this. The Trackplan Archive has been temporarily left out as we needed the space for more articles in the August, September and October issues. However, I would like to take this opportunity to gather a little feedback about what people think of it. Since the archive was introduced at the start of 2016, I/we haven't received a single message or email for/against it, or suggesting any potential layouts for inclusion. Bearing in mind that railway modellers aren't shy about expressing their opinions on any given subject, especially magazine content(!), we're very surprised that nothing has been said either way.

Because the trackplans bookazines have been such a runaway success, and we know how much people like the plans, we thought it would be a popular addition to BRM. But we'd like to know for sure how much you value it and if anyone is collecting the plans as suggested? All constructive feedback is appreciated!

 

Ben

 

Surprised there has been no response.  I think it is an excellent idea and agree with 'flyingsignalman' that plans from earlier issues would also be appreciated. I also find your present track plan style from the drawing board of Ian Wilson very easy on the eye.

 

So far I haven't started ripping my mags apart as suggested.  Past experience of trying to collect 'series' from periodicals has made me rather sceptical of their reliability.  Either they tend to be discontinued after a year or two or their format changes so they won't bind into a compatible filing system.

 

Now to get some peoples backs up.  While an article on how to install DCC sound in an n-gauge terrier may be impressive if only for the skills involved, it is rather specialised and there can't be many people out there who need or are capable of doing it.   The thing about the track plans is that they are usually of interest to all no matter what scale or standard you are working to.  Quite often the first thing I do when reading an article on a layout is to study the track plan as it reveals a lot about the layout.  

 

Putting together a compendium of layout plans as you are doing has to be a long term project and I commend you for it.

[Stanier16]

September's BRM was very enjoyable. Pity though, some of the most interesting layouts did not have a track plan. Is it me or are the DVDs getting shorter and shorter?

[Phil Parker]

I've just been digging through some of the photos Andy took of Melbridge Dock for this issue, but we didn't use for lack of space. That doesn't mean I can't clutter up RMweb with them though!

 

 

The Craftsman etched brass kit 02 diesel pulls a typical (for the layout) train of wagons into the main loop. The warehouses in the background are based on those at Gloucester Docks and scratchbuilt using Daler board covered with plasticard.

 

 

We've always called this the "crane siding" as when the layout was built, where the concrete hut (Roxey whitemetal kit) sits, there was a Wills crane on a brick base. This would never have worked in real life, so I replaced it. Trouble was, the hook couldn't easily be unglued from the crate, so it remains as a memorial to earlier times.

 

 

Built from a Nonneminstre whitmetal kit many years ago, this Planet diesel appeared in Modelling Railways Illustraited magazine, or at least the SPUD power unit did when I explained how I rewheeled it with Romfords of the correct diameter. In the background, the dockside gates sit either side of the baseboard joint helping to hide this.

 

 

[mikes rail]

Having read through this issue witch was very good,what I found was very useful was listing the overall size of some of the layouts including fiddle yards. To often layout plans show overall size and then when reading up on the layout you find an extra 3 or 6 foot added for storage, I hope this format on sizes will be used more often.

[Kelly]

A very good issue I felt. The Drewery Lane has given the inspiration for a track plan I was trying to figure out, so that helps move a project forward a bit.

 

As for the track plan archive, it is a good addition, but perhaps it should be a set of only 3 in the 3 main scales, mixing in classic layouts and well as newer ones from what must be a large archive available by now (assuming copyrights and so on etc).

[sjrixon]

I enjoyed this edition. 

 

Of particular note was the large picture of Drewry Lane over two pages showing the whole layout. We need more of this. The close ups are amazing, but I'd like to see more 'zoomed out' shots to get an idea of the whole layout. Shots of fiddle yards are also nice and we don't get many. Maybe a 'dirty' page at the end of the article showing the layout fully?

 

I'm on the fence with the track plan section. As a digital subscriber, they are all mixed up in each one and I can't 'rip' them out to keep. I much prefer the 'annual' type edition with all the track plans in on place.