SE&CR Caterham 1899 (was 'what process can I use...')

[Lacathedrale]

Phil, I agree completely about a possible future integration into a larger permanent site - that's part of the justification of these being on 18" boards, but I didn't want to get ahead of myself.*

 

My templot plan is almost verbatim as you have shown, with the station compressed by around 25% just to give me some breathing room on the approach, and flipping the turntable so I have space to rotate the orientation a bit - I don't know why but I've  got a real bee in my bonnet about not having the platform faces parallel to the board edges.

 

* Getting fully ahead of myself there's about a million cool things that could be modelled:

• The LB&SCR's line to East Grinstead on the side of the valley, going over chalk cuttings on a viaduct into a tunnel at Riddlesdown
• The Aerodrome sidings at Whyteleaf
• The awesome european-style station at Kenley
• Purley engine shed with the Tattenham Corner branch snaking around behind it
• The junction station at Purley and the Brighton Mainline
• The back of my own house

Edited October 9, 2018 by Lacathedrale

[Harlequin]

I agree generally about platforms parallel to the boards being a bit "static". Sometimes it works OK, though - especially when the surrounding landscape shares the alignment.

 

Have you thought about non-rectangular boards to better accommodate the curve of the station throat? E.g. parallel sides but slightly diagonal ends? Would that work in the places you imagine siting the layout?

 

Like this:

 

• Platforms no longer parallel to boards
• Room for turntable as mapped
• Boards are 4ft 2.5in max length by 18in with a 10 degree turn
• No compression yet. Some is definitely needed so the boards would be slightly shorter
• The full goods siding fan fits in!

Edited October 11, 2018 by Harlequin

[Lacathedrale]

Very astute changes, having seen a few shots of the Railway Hotel and the goods yard walls/entrance, I think I agree with you that it should be included. There will be a nice view down into the yard, past the old engine shed (now goods shed) across the running lines.

 

Doing some research, there was a gasworks up the line that I'm not looking to model -but I think it would be quite prototypical for a trip working from Purley or Bricklayers arms to drop wagons off at Caterham and return, and for the shunting to be done by a local engine. Interestingly, the gasworks had no runaround or headshunt, so would have to be shunted directly from the running lines.  The same trip-then-local working could be used to justify traffic for the aerodrome being seen at the station.

 

Excursions and 'specials' called at a halt just up the line from Caterham so when this closed in 1899 I assume the traffic (or what remained of it) would be directed into Caterham itself. Whether that means we'd see something unusual or not is up for debate - but with that and the Guards barracks up the hill from the station, it's adding to a picture of fairly dense traffic patterns.

 

• Short passenger tank services to Purley (trains still divide here outbound from London to go down to either Caterham or Tattenham Corner - I imagine that tender locos based at the Purley shed would take over the work into London?
• Passenger semi-fast services with tender locos from the get-go to Victoria, Cannon Street and Charing Cross
• Excursions from further afield - unique locos? banged out carriages? who knows?
• Trip workings from Bricklayers Arms and Purley inbound with general merch, coal
• Station pilot/shunting
• Local freight for the gasworks, and aerodrome - maybe even the waterworks by Kenley?
• Outbound freight with coke, tar and local produce (the Electric Light Works near the station!)

 

 

[Harlequin]

Hi Bill,

 

There's oodles of charm and period character in your descriptions and the photos!

 

I had a thought about modelling Station Avenue: It might be worth treating that as a separate bolt-on scenic section. The advantages would be:

• You wouldn't have to sacrifice those 6 inches on the main boards
• You could capture the width and angle of the road better
• It would be a neat separate project for later
• You could work on it without having to setup the whole layout
• You could make it wider than the main baseboard to properly position the hotel and possibly the livery stable (if it was still there in your period).

 

BTW: There's a 1958 1:1250 map which looks to have more accurate surveying, including the most of the main trackwork. It has been simplified by that time of course but I think the basic lines would not have changed since your period. It shows the outermost goods line terminating very close to the road and I think it would be good to capture that length in your model, if possible.

Edited October 11, 2018 by Harlequin

[Lacathedrale]

Hi Phil,

 

A kind gent from the Templot forums with more skill than I have is going to re-draw the templot plan with 1900's trackwork (all the turnouts in mind for example are REA-spec) to remove the kinks where feasible. I gather this is the 1:2500 map to which you are referring? https://maps.nls.uk/view/103031340 - what a shame all that beautiful pointwork got simplified, but I guess they'd be running EMU's for 30+ years and the good service only soldered on for another 4 after the map was made.

 

Some more tweaks:

• The throat board can cut off sharply after the end of the goods headshunt without a problem, because a FY module can contain a transition of plain track and the factory view blocker before the actual fiddle section - given that the absolute max length for a train will be approx 2', a. 2'6" cassette-based fiddle yard should be more than enough for now.
• This means the inclusion of Station Rd and half relief Railway Hotel on the station board - in reality from the bufferstops through to the railway hotel is less than 6" in model form so would be a bit over-the-top to have as a separate module. I do take the point about it being removable though, so will mount this entire section on a separate ply section that will bolt onto the module frame.
• I am happy for the goods yard to be slightly slimmed down, if it means the loco turntable can be in the correct position - ideally splitting those tracks earlier to facilitate the coal staithes between the tracks would be awesome.

Hopefully I should have this in the next few days. In the meantime I've got some locomotive drawings from the SECR Society and a couple of books on coaches and wagons to trawl through.

 

Some more general tidbits that just need somewhere to be collated:

• Beadle Bros (a coal merchant) built an office in the goods yard, I gather they probably operated out of the yard before then - maybe part of the confusion of the last goods yard track 'entering' into the adjacent livery stable? See the two attachments - (s-l1611.jpg) looking into the goods yard shows a van which appears to be marked SER where there is just a wall and no roof visible behind, and the s-l1604.jpg presumably later showing the coal merchant in situ. There's also a very evocative picture of the Livery stables that Phil is besotten with, (s-l104.jpg - this the view is looking parallel to the goods yard tracks - they are the other side of the buildings on the right). Station Avenue is the road on the right behind the bus).
• The OS grid marks a 'covered footbridge' and then a ramp down to platform level - quite different to the pre-1905 station which just had an earthen ramp the whole way. There is also a canopied walkway around the west/bottom side of the building which includes half a dozen stairs down to the end loading dock. This implies the platform and dock height should be about four or five feet higher than the walkway, which pictures show to be the same floor level of the station building. Attachment s-l1609.jpg shows a 1950's view (including the new coal staithe positions - maybe a result of the Beadle Bros getting their own building instead of operating out of the stables?) but clearly shows the dock and platform height to be the standard. I think a site visit is required, even though this entire section is below a Waitrose and a multi-storey car-park.

 

 

[Tank]

Hello! 

I just wanted to say that I'm really looking forward to seeing your layout as you build it - stumbled across the thread today.  Your research is very good!  The quarry at Purley was huge, and is now a large yard and sidings next to the station.  Warren Road ran next to the station initially, but as the quarry got deeper they pushed the road back to where it is now, with the chalk 'cliff' to one side - hence the road above called Cliff End.

I was planning to make an N Gauge model of the line myself (as you stated earlier in the thread), but sadly I'm just too busy.  Happy to help with any research that you may need - I have about 400 postcards/photo's/negatives of the railway.

Keep up the good work.
Chris.

[Lacathedrale]

Hi Chris, that's really kind of you to say - I realised after my final post there, that I just don't yet have the skill to lay the complex trackwork that Caterham requires, nor paint and line the locomotives - the project is in limbo (hence it's location here in 'Design' rather than 'In actuality') but I'm very happy you found enjoyment reading it.

[Lacathedrale]

I've just come back around to this and with a couple of years experience in Templot put together another plan, a mere 3' x 12' for an exact scalein 4mm/ft

 

 

What do you mean, it's only two curved douple slips, a branch crossover and an asymmetric tandem!?

 

I'm still not clear on what that headshunt is meant for, but found some pictures of the engine shed (far left)

 

 

and here:

 

 

And one thing I didn't notice from the following shot was the vestigial goods shed behind the station, and the traction engine on stage-right:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Lacathedrale]

Attempting the plan with a 'model railway builder's eye', that is to say something with an eye for the practical rather than the real - doesn't actually save very much space at all:

 

 

Just about a foot in length, hardly worth the compromise!

 

Here's a shot of the station staff in 1886:

 

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Lacathedrale

[Harlequin]

2 hours ago, Lacathedrale said:

Attempting the plan with a 'model railway builder's eye', that is to say something with an eye for the practical rather than the real - doesn't actually save very much space at all:

 

 

Just about a foot in length, hardly worth the compromise!

If that foot allowed you to model the faces of the buildings on the other side of station road it would be well worth it. That would help put the station in the townscape and frame the end of the layout.

 

Edit: Sorry, I see I'm repeating myself, somewhat.

 

I still love that crazy station building, BTW! It’s worth building for that alone!

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Harlequin

[Lacathedrale]

I just read MRJ35 and was inspired both by Charford (in the sense of a BLT-too-big-for-its-britches) and Wickham (in the sense of having the road and terraced houses 'capping' the end of the layout).

 

I think at 14' you may as well be in for a penny, in for a pround when it comes to length!

[Tank]

Great to see this layout coming back to life again. 

I notice that your title says 1905 - the original station building had been knocked down by 1900 and replaced by what is at the station now.  Unless you're using rule 1 of course!

[Lacathedrale]

Hi NewSouthEaston - the plan has morphed from pre to. post- rebuild a few times - just circling the idea still really, not sure it's alive!

[Lacathedrale]

Wow, I just lost a massve post

 

I was lucky enough to be sent a signalling diagram before the doubling of the track, copied from an original at Kew. It shows quite clearly that there was no double slip connecting the coal yard and the goods yard, and generally give a more simplistic view of the layout. At first I was a little dissapointed by this, but then I realised it would probably work in the favour of operation -  the illustrated London News of 1856 (from where that lovely engraving in the post linked below originates) suggests that the local limestone, firestone and building stone from adjacent quarries would provide amount of traffic - the Surrey Iron Railway's Coulsdon, Godstone and Merstham railway line would have closed about 8 years previous a few miles away).

 

(1856 engraving of Caterham station - Kilby's livery stables visible on right, hotel on left and the hill up to the future site of Caterham Barracks behind)

 

My understanding is that the predicted rush on stone from the end of the valley came to nought, but considering the doubling of the line in 1900, I would have thought that it’s likely the facilities would be running close to capacity approaching that period. 

 

The intermediate halt  just outside Caterham at Halliloo Farm would have presumably been open. Nowadays Halliloo Farm is nearby in Woldingham and supplies prize longhorn cattle -would it have done so then? Given its halt status it's probably fairly unlikely to be the source of any traffic but hop picker excursions down the Caterham branch were very much a thing, with any old wagon that could be rustled up.

 

The gasworks at Whyteleafe connects in such a way it looks like it can only be shunting by trains travelling towards Caterham - so presumably tar, coke and coal would have been taken down to the terminus, sorted and shunted with a way freight.

 

The Caterham Barracks would have been 30 years old by that point, but reading between the lines it seems it was very much isolated from Caterham town itself - would this have seen much rail traffic, do you think?

 

Anyway, I have redrawn the signal diagram as best I can with the below:

 

 

The original diagram is here:

 

My interpretation of the levers is as follows:

1. Outer home (I would imagine outer home rather than distant despite the drawing, measuring it up shows a distance of about 400yds between 1 and 2)
2. Home
3. Ground signal for 5 from main line - wrong side of the diagram?
4. Facing point lock for 5
5. Points+trap for coal yard
6. Ground signal for 5 from coal yard
7. Ground signal for 10 from main line
8. Ground signal for 12 from main line - wrong side of the diagram?
9. Facing point locks for 10 and 12
10. Points+trap to engine shed/goods yard
11. Ground signal for 10 to goods yard
12. Points for No 1 siding
13. Spare
14. Spare
15. Points + single side trap for No 2 siding
16. Ground signal for No 2 siding towards main
17. Trap for No. 1 siding
18. Ground signal for No 1 siding entry
19. Ground signal for No. 1 siding crossover
20. Crossover for main/No. 1 siding
21. Spare
22. Advanced Starter
23. Platform Starter


Though signalling has always been a bit of a black art for me I feel like I'm slowly getting used to it - and I think it would be particularly interesting to have the signals and interlocking set up properly on a layout where the plan is relatively simple. For a train to go from the No. 2 siding to the coal wharf, the signalman would have to (I'm sure the order is slightly wrong on this):

• set 1 to on, to unlock 2
• set 2 and 23 to 'on', which would unlock the FPL on 9.
• 10 and 12 would have both-ways locking on each other, so
• 10 would need to be set to reverse, 
• 12 to reverse to half unlock 15
• 9's FPL reapplied to fully unlock 15
• 15 would be set to reverse
• finally 16 could be pulled off.
• The train would then move from No. 2 to the main line between the outer home and come to a dead stop at 22.
• Pull 4 to unlock 5 and lock 2
• Pull 5 to reverse to unlock 3
• Pull 3 to signal the train can reverse back into the coal yard

I'm sure given the congestion that must have been evident at this station for a double tracking of an otherwise small and unremarkable branch line, that there would be passenger services arriving or departing while this was going on - so the whole shooting match would likely roll on back to support an arrival into the platform, a runaround (remembering those dead stops and pulling off and locking the signals and points) before departing, while the venerable Cudworth 2-4-0 wheezes and creaks away at 6.

 

I hope that's been fun and enjoyable!

 

[Lacathedrale]

Another bit of info was the use of Caterham Barracks (the biggest army barracks in the country at the time) - I've no info on the particulars of the railway travel, but during WW1 trains from other roads were regularly ending up there:

 

Another re-jig of the track plan in an idle moment - I'm not convinced that the use of a double-slip as a catch point on the goods/engine shed road would make sense, so in this case I've substituted a single slip and cried off to the SECR group for more information:

 

 

The above is 7' x 18" and includes space for the livery stables and the hotel front-left, as well as the retaining wall and lots of space for the slopes of Harestone valley and some larger houses peeking through. The one just above the end of the platform runaround is the back of a masonic hall!  Overall, it does look lovely, fits into the space I have and minus the pair of double-slips it seems very doable.

 

There was a gasworks at Whyteleaf with no runaround, so presumably coal, coke and tar would have been brought down from the inbound pick-up goods and marshalled here in Caterham. Caterham Barracks (as above) would have no doubt had much in the way of miiltary supplies, and of course the coal road running along the full length of the frotn of the layout.

 

Traffic at this passenger traffic would have been provided for with the "Caterham sets", a 6w brake third - 6w second - bogie composite - 6w brake third four carriage set. Minor lines such as this would however no doubt have hosted all manner of rag-tag equipment from the LCR/SER partnership, venerable 2-2-2 and 2-4-0 locos from Stephenson and Sharp. In latter years the engine shed had a Q-class 4-4-0 stabled there - the engine shed at Purley was not completed until 1905 and as such would have been a long journey for the first light engine movement of the day if this wasn't available.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Lacathedrale

[Lacathedrale]

As a notional effort of reviewing the prototypical track-plan of Caterham post-doubling, it is quite incredible what distances are involved. Note the four houses adjacent each other that are visible in all the plans:

 

The 1896 plan has a distance from the first point at the throat to the bufferstops of the platform road of 275 yards - the outer home signal is about 300yards further out:

 

After redoubling, the 1912 plan must encompass a much greater area - 420 yards to the first point, and then another 100' of headshunt beyond that parallel to the mainline:

 

By way of comparison here's the 1957 edition - the turntable is long gone:

 

 

The branch was electrified with the ex-LSWR 3rd rail DC system and was served by those company's 3rd rail MU's - reotractively dubbed 3SUB. Here's a 1936 shot showing an MU in platform 1, and the gantry signals:

 

 

Later, here's a 1949 shot showing the station and yard to good effect, as well as the signalbox which replaced the Saxby one detailed in a previous post. Presumably this 3SUB now has an additional car and is technically a 4SUB:

 

 

Freight ceased on the branch in 1964 but there was still a good amount of freight traffic in '52 as shown below. Infact, this is the exact date the 'resident' shunter, an ex-LBSCR C2x took over all freight duties on the branch, shedded at New Cross Gate - the Bulleid jackshaft-driven shunter 11001 was stabled at Norwood Junction and apparently worked the freight on this branch quite a few times in the early 50's too.

 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Lacathedrale

[Lacathedrale]

It seems there are very definitive cut-off points for modelling this branch:

 

Pre-1898 - very bucolic with mostly 6w stock and  a motley assortment of SER  tank locos, and older 2-2-2 and 2-4-0 locos of Sharp/Cudworth/Stephenson design.

1898 to 1912 -  Line doubled, station rebuilt and Purley engine shed built by the S.E.R. which stabling various Stirling tank locomotives there (principally Q and R's) so it's likely the Caterham shed fell out of use around this time. A large rail-served factory  and refuse site is built midway up the branch. Longer rakes of close-coupled 6w stock in use.

1928-36 (roughly) - the branch switched over to full electric operation for all passenger services, using what have been noted as '3SUB' EMUs - whether they are cannibalised SECR coaches, LSWR units or other is yet to be determined, then 4SUB and 2+2EPBs. Steam power limited to freight.

1937-48 - malachite green and sunshine letters everywhere

1949-64 - BR Black and malachite green, with the Bulleid DM 11001 shunter and an ex-LBSCR C2X allocated for duties.

 

In some ways it feels as though the post-doubling, post-electrification layout is more interesting - a mixture of passenger EMUs and locos in varnished wood and olive green panels rubbing shoulders - no need to model dozens of six wheelers, too!

[Lacathedrale]

For the sake of completeness, here's a dead-scale reckoning of post-electrification Caterham in 2FS in a footprint of  2' x 10':

 

 

I think as an exhibition layout, this would be really fun - very well documented with ground-level and aerial photographs I think one could probably compress the layout further - by cropping the scenic areas at the edges - a much shorter run before the up main goes off-scene and the omission of the street scene capping the station building. - to achieve a visible area of approximately 8'6 - but for the sake of eighteen inches it seems ridicolous to cut them off. By using trapezoidal baseboards, broadly following the arc of the track, it's no wider than 18" at any point.

 

Interestingly, after much fiddling in GIMP and Templot, any compression requires tweaking of the yard geometry in all kinds of weird ways - you can't shove the coal siding inwards without making the general goods track inaccessible. You can't shove the general goods track back without it fouling the goods shed, and you can't move the goods shed without it affecting the location of the loading platform.

 

A sector-plate fiddle yard would most likely be the best choice. Four 60' bogie coaches and a loco would probably be the longest thing to be seen on the line (still less than half the length of the platforms!), for the last days in the spring of '28 when the juice was turned on permanently - so a fiddle yard allocation of 3' would be more than enough, particularly with the ability to cantilever the sector plate out if neccesary.

 

By splitting the layout into 5' (road scene + station) + 4' (throat) + 4' (running lines + fiddle yard) wouldn't cross any major divisions, but it would make the layout very much a 'garage- or exhibition-only' affair.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Lacathedrale

[TJ52]

Perhaps the only drawback might be the amount of buildings that would need to be constructed, unless of course that is a particular interest or if it was a group project.

 

Out of interest, is Holborn Viaduct on the back burner?

 

Terry

[Lacathedrale]

Hi Terry, to be honest this was more a thought exercise that I was hoping to share with RMweb rather than a direct plan for a layout I'd be attempting. It's wonderful to do the research and gain wider context and understanding - and that's half of the pleasure for me.

 

HV has been on the back burner since it's been 'imminent' that Peco were to release their double slip since midway through last year (?). I'm debating the relative merits of using standard Code 75 stuff temporarily to get the layout running, or giving in and hand lay the missing parts of the formation myself! I'll post a short update in that thread with the latest.

[TJ52]

Thanks for that. I'll look forward to seeing progress as it happens. 

 

Terry 

[Lacathedrale]

No problem!  

 

It seems the Caterham Power Station ceased generation in 1928, so could in theory form part of a layout that was balancing on the tip-toe of electrification (finalised with the final day of steam passenger service in March 1928) and a scenic break. There are several allusions to rail-served industries in the Middleton Press book (which I was scouring for various sliding timeline points) that don't have rail connections - in addition to the above, the water works at Kenley was very much not rail connected, with only an adjacent goods yard and a nearby rail-served factory that could potentially be earmarked. 'Kenley Depot' is also shown, but the only aerieal photos and maps I can find mark it as a local authority refuse disposal site!

 

It's not a big surprise to consider there was significant wartime traffic on the Caterham branch given it's proximity to Caterham Barracks, but quite another to see a 10-coach train pulled by a Q-class in 1960 captioned '08:40 troop train from Caterham to Brecon'!!

 

 

Here are some more rare photos I've managed to dig up - soon after doubling (Caterham Power station's chomney is visible, and the six-wheeled 'caterham' close-coupled sets being piloted out of the No. 2 down siding

 

The opposite view gives a clear shot towards the goods yard, the vast stores of coal to the left - cut off by railway tracks either side - what could they be for? Storage before manually shuttling them down to the coal merchant at the entrance to the good yard (where there were even more staithes?)

 

 

Some twenty or thirty years later, both platforms host a 3Sub.  It will be another five years before the SR decide to augment the 3Subs with additional cars directly, and it won't be until after nationalisation - another twelve years - that until all the services running to Caterham are 4Subs.

 

 

This view a few years later shows the 'bookend' scene of the layout that would be attempted beyond the station building, those on the left being low relief against the end of the layout.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Lacathedrale

[Lacathedrale]

I've been taking notes from a variety of places for timelines - and between electrification the post-war period really not a huge amount would have changed in terms of station layout, rolling stock or operation.

 

The war meant that olive green would still likely predominate into the mid 40's. A fly on the wall would see a gradual trend away from 3Subs cobbled together from ex-SECR coaching stock, augmentations with new/mismatched trailers to become de-facto 4Subs, to purpose built 4Subs and then eventually bulleid-designed flat-front 4Subs.

 

I wouldn't plan to model all these eventualities, but if I model the layout in  a late 30's condition then it can reach both forward and backward with relative ease - either to bring the layout forward to the eve of electrification and have a Q or H-class pulling a bogie birdcage set around, or push it back enough to see the first 4Epbs (although by this point I think it would be pretty hard to justify anything in SR olive!). It is quite bizarre to look at the mainline and see an LBSCR D1 pulling a train of half a dozen six wheelers as a standard train between London Bridge and Norwood Junction just two years before Caterham had a full EMU service:

 

 

@Oldddudders has spoken of 'berthing in 'hole-in-the-wall' places, compared to @bécasse's advice that Caterham never needed stock berthed - but I have found a picture which at least generally supports the former, even if only as a lay-over and thirty five years beyond my time period:

 

 

It's alot more challenging to get information on the freight workings of the period, my only information is that anecdotal:

• The use of 'tank locos' only on the branch (as a comment on his surprise of the provision of a turntable at Caterham in the 1900 rebuild - presumably not aware of the troop train requirements?) - maybe only in relation to the passenger traffic?
• With the closure of the ex-SER shed at Purley in 1928 the next nearest shed was New Cross Gate (LBSC) and then Norwood in 1937
• A C2X was allocated from Norwood Shed in 1952 until the branch's cessation of freight traffic in 1964, and the Bulleid DM 11001 opereated the branch freight in 1950.
• There are a number of photos of the 0-6-4T J-class around Purley on fitted freight workings and the 0-6-0 K-class were
• Annoyingly, I can't find my list of Purley shed loco allocations - I have gone through lots of my books!

Edited June 8, 2020 by Lacathedrale

[Sturminster_Newton]

Restrictions

Accessed via extendable ladder and relatively small hatchway, so requires modules no larger than 5' x 18" each. 

While insulated is not heated, one or two modules must drop-out for use elsewhere in the house.

There are joists 8' in from the ends, so activity must be centred in the middle of the area.

Desires

 

I've looked at this lengthy debate and how the module sizes have expanded and now do not match the design briefs. Like Topsy the design has got bigger and wider the original constraints outed and the new embraced.

 

Build what you like but do embrace your original design briefs and stick with them.

 

The space available for the layout is realistically 24' x 4' if full walk-around access is to be retained.

 

Committing yourself to 90' of scenic endeavor is fantastically expensive to unify from start to finish.

 

Even a modest mainline through station is going to need two operators if you are running anything other than a Sunday timetable from the early days of the 20th Century with bus replacement service...

 

A branchline station like Heathfield on the Teign Valley and Moretonhampsted line would stretch most singleton muddlers you will need to automate at least part of it

 

Those areas tucked into the roof pitch will be a headache to landscape as access is only from one side which can be temper trying in the boiling heat of summer as well as the frigid depths of winter.

 

You will have a huge investment in track to install and maintain.

 

And you have yet to put the baseboard and scenic costs to those base track figures.

 

If you heart lies in operation you will resent every minute that is spent with the messy and the scenic when you just want to run trains, and set route and signals.

 

 

 

If you slap something down and move rapidly on you will regret the initial progress and tear it out and start again and again and again as your scenic detailing improves with each restart.

 

Above all never lose sight of the fact you are building for pleasure not something to be pilloried to for years with little chance of seeing it finished.

 

Alternatively:

 

There is a lot to be learned from the Freemo approach.

Build in the module style and string units together that way you build a 3'x15" unit and can finish each one in a few weeks.

You stay fresh the layout gets built albeit as a series of scenes that you can put together in any order.

3'x 15" can be constructed in the warmer habitable areas of the home and taken up to the loft for installation on the main 'layout support system'.

Build a couple of off stage fiddle areas so that you can operate the puff puffs and any module away from home.

Treat each module as a self contained 'scene', that way you may have any variety of miniature landscapes to run trains through.

 

Qualifier

 

A friend of mine was the member of a local muddling 'club' who built a mostly correct model of their local mainline station counting every course of bricks and roof tile.

His home railway is painted boards laid on loft rafters with a double track circuit, through station with storage roads on and around which trundle his collection of OO models of various vintages.

He gets enormous pleasure from operating his train-set.

 

Don't bite off more than you can chew and don't let the railway be your master.