Modern Image split

[Les1952]

As the exhibition manager of a smallish (16-17 layouts) show I would like to have a bigger choice when it comes to modern layouts.

 

HOWEVER, I have room for ONE decent OO tailchaser if I am to fit the rest in.  Any more and I can' get the traders in or someone will have to carry a heavy OO tailchaser up two flights of stairs.....

 

I am NOT in the market for another MPD layout.  I have one booked for 2018, another for 2019 and another pencilled in for 2020.  Aside from that every diesel "ticking over" sound layout we've had has had more complaints from those on nearby stands for two days reach the committee than compliments from punters.  

 

Please, please, please will someone do a few decent sub-10 foot layouts in OO.  This years show has N-gauge outnumbering all other scales (and we have OO, TT  and O this year).  Why?  Because that is where the good layouts are at the moment.

 

Mind you, if we do get drowned out by diesel noises at the show we can always play Status Quo over the PA....

 

 

All the very best

Les

 

NOTE -- For those who looked solely at the pics "No Place" (current BRM) is set in the mid SEVENTIES - ie beyond the end of steam on BR and just before the miners' strike.  The steam in the pics are almost all kitbuilt or heavily modified, and thus a lot more interesting as models than my "out of the box" diesels.

[dj_crisp]

Actually the solution is for D&E modellers to build something - specifically a layout. 

 

The flip side of the obsession with "the definitive Class 37" and heavy stock hacks is a relative lack of interest in building layouts. An alarming proportion of D&E layouts have been built for various "challenges" - alarming because it suggests that unless a rocket is put under them D&E modellers don't do anything involving baseboards. There is a marked tendency for D&E modelling to focus on what is effectively a glass-case model of a single vehicle.

 

This may be because D&E modellers are younger, and possibly weighted towards the SE (and maybe some conurbations), because that's where the surviving network is densest and growing - and that is also precisely where the chronic housing shortage bites hardest. If you need a spare room, a loft or a garden shed to build a layout then D&E modellers are the least likely to have access to such luxuries.

 

Nevertheless layouts are still possible - Buckingham Mk1 - not exactly a micro - was built when Peter Denny was living in a single rented bed-sit room

 

There are however two other factors cutting in the other direction. Some D&E modellers seem to have the attitude that they join a club so that the club will provide them with a large exhibition layout on which to run their trains at shows. Building the layout themselves isn't part of their vision - they are stock-builders, and possibly regard that as a higher and more skilful form of modelling than building layouts - because that's where the prestige is in D&E. I've known modellers who built (kit-built) stock that looked very pretty but simply didn't work properly - a fact to which they were completely oblivious and which they had no interest in addressing , because they weren't even around to see the thing run. (Whereas Muggins starts to tear his hair out and feel his model is utterly worthless if it won't stay on the rails in all circumstances all day and start without touching or stalling every time)

 

Secondly most D&E modellers are fundamentally uncomfortable with the nature of their prototype. Most of them are basically interested in freight, and tolerate passenger trains as a necessary supplement - the 21st century British network is essentially a passenger network. Hence the obsession with Peak Forest and the desperate quest for the EWS equivalent of a West Virginia coal road. This is kicking against the pricks. It is probably not a coincidence that the strongest sectors of D&E in terms of producing good well-observed layouts are third rail and LT modelling - because the people involved are comfortable with their chosen prototype as a passenger railway.

 

We are awash with TMDs but I'll tell you what I've never seen modelled and that's a multiple-unit depot. Despite the fact that the traction depots of which I was most conscious were places like LN, CA, CO , IL (and potentially others like Hull Botanic Gardens and Bradford Hammerton St). The average "diesel depot" bears little resemblance to places like IM, TO, TS, FP and the rest . In fact it is a complete fantasy - a model of something which didn't actually exist , but the modeller wishes did. That is not a sound basis for layout-building

 

<rant mode disengaged>

 

 

This is the funniest thing I've read all day. Thank you for your words of wisdom. 

[Suzie]

As the exhibition manager of a smallish (16-17 layouts) show I would like to have a bigger choice when it comes to modern layouts.

 

HOWEVER, I have room for ONE decent OO tailchaser if I am to fit the rest in.  Any more and I can' get the traders in or someone will have to carry a heavy OO tailchaser up two flights of stairs.....

 

I am NOT in the market for another MPD layout.  I have one booked for 2018, another for 2019 and another pencilled in for 2020.  Aside from that every diesel "ticking over" sound layout we've had has had more complaints from those on nearby stands for two days reach the committee than compliments from punters.  

 

Please, please, please will someone do a few decent sub-10 foot layouts in OO.  This years show has N-gauge outnumbering all other scales (and we have OO, TT  and O this year).  Why?  Because that is where the good layouts are at the moment.

 

Mind you, if we do get drowned out by diesel noises at the show we can always play Status Quo over the PA....

 

 

All the very best

Les

 

NOTE -- For those who looked solely at the pics "No Place" (current BRM) is set in the mid SEVENTIES - ie beyond the end of steam on BR and just before the miners' strike.  The steam in the pics are almost all kitbuilt or heavily modified, and thus a lot more interesting as models than my "out of the box" diesels.

 

 

You don't want MPDs, but 4mm layouts have to be under 10' - that rather rules out anything remotely modern beyond the '153 and a bus shelter' layout with rather restricted operational appeal.

[LBRJ]

You don't want MPDs, but 4mm layouts have to be under 10' - that rather rules out anything remotely modern beyond the '153 and a bus shelter' layout with rather restricted operational appeal.

 

Not really if you think even a little outside the box.

A 4mm class 153 is only 12 niches long...you  still have another 9 feet to go at here......

The well known bitsa or half a station idea would let you run HST services in such a space, same with modelling half a reception sidings or small yard.

 

There are literally dozens of small space ideas for "D&E" ( just whoever invented that term?) just as there are for earlier based layouts.

[Clive Mortimore]

Not really if you think even a little outside the box.

A 4mm class 153 is only 12 niches long...you  still have another 9 feet to go at here......

The well known bitsa or half a station idea would let you run HST services in such a space, same with modelling half a reception sidings or small yard.

 

There are literally dozens of small space ideas for "D&E" ( just whoever invented that term?) just as there are for earlier based layouts.

A group of modellers who realised that calling all diesel and electric model railways "Modern Image" wasn't fitting for a period covering 60 odd years. That group was the Diesel and Electric Modellers United. Please do visit our exhibition at Burton on Trent, Town Hall, 2nd and 3rd June 2018. 

[Les1952]

You don't want MPDs, but 4mm layouts have to be under 10' - that rather rules out anything remotely modern beyond the '153 and a bus shelter' layout with rather restricted operational appeal.

 

My PUNTERS want variety. 

 

Punters keep the show in business.

 

Les

[Les1952]

Not really if you think even a little outside the box.

A 4mm class 153 is only 12 niches long...you  still have another 9 feet to go at here......

The well known bitsa or half a station idea would let you run HST services in such a space, same with modelling half a reception sidings or small yard.

 

There are literally dozens of small space ideas for "D&E" ( just whoever invented that term?) just as there are for earlier based layouts.

 

If you look at the book "Building Micro Layouts" by Paul Lunn you will find over 20 ideas for layouts below six feet in length.

Only TWO are MPD layouts, one of which is unashamedly steam era.

 

Les

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hello all,

 

I agree that there are way too many MPD depots, and most have very little basis in reality. Though Peterborough - the inspiration for Bachmann's Scenecraft single lane servicing shed - does kind of fit the bill.

 

The issue wth smaller contemporary layouts may be operational interest. A GWR branch line could include loco run-around manoeuvres and the marshalling of small pick-up goods trains; the same layout in the present day would probably feature just the same unit shuttling back and forth.

 

And modern freight tends to comprise long block trains running between large scale specialist loading or unloading terminals. This can be tough to depict convincingly. This does give N an advantage here (I would say that, of course, as an N gauge enthusiast) and our local club has built layouts with a steel terminal, cement works exchange siding, brickworks and quarry as the freight focus, operating close-to scale length trains.

 

Incidentally, re the whole Cyril Freezer "Modern Image" debate; my understanding is that at the time the phrase was coined the railways were coming out of a period of very rapid and significant change - from Beeching to Kinnear/Calvert; from steam to blue electrics - and he was attempting to reflect that. Perhaps it would have been better if he'd used the phrase "Corporate Image" - which would've neatly described the post-1964 era he was considering.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

[Phil Parker]

I think we are getting to the root of the problem. Small spaces don't provide enough area to convincingly model a modern scene. As Ben says, your GWR branch station fits in 6ft, but now this would be a shuttle service with a 2-car DMU. Realistic, but not exciting to model, although there is something oddly mesmerising about watching something like this run by a shuttle unit. As for shunting, well that's moving boxes around by crane nowadays and you can't find a working Heljan model now. Even if you could, how many container yard layouts do people want to see?

 

For a magazine article, I think most people are hoping to see a proper sized layout. Only that can provide enough angles for a series of interesting features. Now, I appreciate there was one at Glasgow, but we need 13. A YEAR. Or at least we do if you want a D&E layout in every issue of BRM. If we assume an average of 3 years to build each mode, that means there should be 39 layouts at various stages of construction at any one point to feed the demand. Now multiply that by 4 so all the mags can have a D&E layout that hasn't been seen elsewhere in each issue.

 

Having said that, the steam boys manage to feed the demand since they (we are told) fill up all the available slots in each publication.

 

So, there is demand from both magazines and exhibition managers, but not enough supply. It would suggest that if you want to make a name for yourself in the hobby, D&E modelling is the way to do it, but you'll need to work hard to find a suitable prototype. 

[Clive Mortimore]

I think we are getting to the root of the problem. Small spaces don't provide enough area to convincingly model a modern scene. As Ben says, your GWR branch station fits in 6ft, but now this would be a shuttle service with a 2-car DMU. Realistic, but not exciting to model, although there is something oddly mesmerising about watching something like this run by a shuttle unit. As for shunting, well that's moving boxes around by crane nowadays and you can't find a working Heljan model now. Even if you could, how many container yard layouts do people want to see?

 

For a magazine article, I think most people are hoping to see a proper sized layout. Only that can provide enough angles for a series of interesting features. Now, I appreciate there was one at Glasgow, but we need 13. A YEAR. Or at least we do if you want a D&E layout in every issue of BRM. If we assume an average of 3 years to build each mode, that means there should be 39 layouts at various stages of construction at any one point to feed the demand. Now multiply that by 4 so all the mags can have a D&E layout that hasn't been seen elsewhere in each issue.

 

Having said that, the steam boys manage to feed the demand since they (we are told) fill up all the available slots in each publication.

 

So, there is demand from both magazines and exhibition managers, but not enough supply. It would suggest that if you want to make a name for yourself in the hobby, D&E modelling is the way to do it, but you'll need to work hard to find a suitable prototype. 

Hi Phil

 

One of the moans about Glasgow was there were too many "modern image" layouts. I found it quite refreshing to see a large show with so many large D&E layouts. There was one quite nice small diesel depot layout, the other depot layout was Aberdeen Kirkhill and that ain't small. Otherwise the other layouts were fairly big and many continuous runs.

 

Hi Everyone else

 

If you go to Alley Pally this month there will be two huge D&E layouts Mostyn and Calcutta Sidings, both P4, both continuous runs, neither has the traditional station model in the middle, both have well modelled locomotives and stock not just RTR class 66 in various liveries, and both have been well researched for the time period and geographical locations they represent. I cannot think of a large P4 steam layout that matches these two. Both are very different from each other to view.

Conversely I am manning Dave Tailby's Friday Bridge layout (again) and it might be the smallest layout at the show, it was at Glasgow. It too is  D&E layout, plenty of shunting with traditional goods wagons in the heart of the Fens. There is great variety of D&E layouts just so many modellers walk around wearing their smoke deflectors as blinkers.

[Andy Y]

Conversely I am manning Dave Tailby's Friday Bridge layout (again) and it might be the smallest layout at the show, it was at Glasgow. It too is  D&E layout, plenty of shunting with traditional goods wagons in the heart of the Fens. 

 

Please do ask the Fogeyman about my problems getting people to write up their D&E layout. He is now a record holder.

[Harlequin]

Is there potential for an article here to help give D&E modellers some impetus?

 

"How to model interesting and believable D&E in a small space", explaining the challenges, the options and the cliches to avoid?

 

To answer the original point: I'm a post-grouping steam fan (sorry) but I want my mainstream magazines to cover more than that aspect, for interest and inspiration.

[Howard Smith]

Is there potential for an article here to help give D&E modellers some impetus?

 

"How to model interesting and believable D&E in a small space", explaining the challenges, the options and the cliches to avoid?

 

To answer the original point: I'm a post-grouping steam fan (sorry) but I want my mainstream magazines to cover more than that aspect, for interest and inspiration.

 

Incidentally, an article on such is due to appear in BRM soon...

[Ravenser]

I don't normally post in the lunchhour, but this time I have to make an exception

 

 

 

Suzie:  You don't want MPDs, but 4mm layouts have to be under 10' - that rather rules out anything remotely modern beyond the '153 and a bus shelter' layout with rather restricted operational appeal.

 

 

Is there potential for an article here to help give D&E modellers some impetus?

 

"How to model interesting and believable D&E in a small space", explaining the challenges, the options and the cliches to avoid?

 

To answer the original point: I'm a post-grouping steam fan (sorry) but I want my mainstream magazines to cover more than that aspect, for interest and inspiration.

 

For a worked example of what might be done, see my own small diesel layout, Blacklade

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/343/entry-16399-multiple-as-in-diesel-multiple-unit/

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/343/entry-1189-in-which-ravenser-finally-locates-the-create-blogs-page/

 

 

 

This is all of 8'6" long but can happily accomodate DMUs up to 3 car (2 x 2 car 57' units with discomfort), loco + 2, (when I finish the thing) Pacer + 153 . Total footprint is just under 6 square feet, width varies from 1' to 5" (yes that  is inches). Storage footprint is 4'3" x 18". Operational interest is high - I can run 6-7 trains on the layout at any time and run parcels and engineers trains , joining and splitting of units, Minories style loco-hauled substitute , tank for the fuelling point. There is no revenue freight traffic on the layout, and most trains are DMUs

 

It's my main home layout , and has been out to a couple of shows .

 

I'm cautious about self-promotion but the layout was quite deliberately intended as "proof of concept" to show that an interesting small layout with plenty of operational interest could be based on  a multiple unit operated passenger lrailway. Places like Lowestoft, Yarmouth, Lincoln St Marks, Scarborough and Cleethorpes were very much in mind

[Steamport Southport]

To answer the OP in regard to having "split" magazines. I'm one of those people that likes all railways.

 

But if it split into steam and "other" then I'm afraid it would be the "other" that I would ditch as I would be reluctant to buy yet another magazine on a regular basis. I already buy half a dozen a month as well as MLI and most issues of MRJ. I think one more would be one too many.

 

 

 

Jason

[Legend]

I think we are getting to the root of the problem. Small spaces don't provide enough area to convincingly model a modern scene. As Ben says, your GWR branch station fits in 6ft, but now this would be a shuttle service with a 2-car DMU. Realistic, but not exciting to model, although there is something oddly mesmerising about watching something like this run by a shuttle unit. As for shunting, well that's moving boxes around by crane nowadays and you can't find a working Heljan model now. Even if you could, how many container yard layouts do people want to see?

 

For a magazine article, I think most people are hoping to see a proper sized layout. Only that can provide enough angles for a series of interesting features. Now, I appreciate there was one at Glasgow, but we need 13. A YEAR. Or at least we do if you want a D&E layout in every issue of BRM. If we assume an average of 3 years to build each mode, that means there should be 39 layouts at various stages of construction at any one point to feed the demand. Now multiply that by 4 so all the mags can have a D&E layout that hasn't been seen elsewhere in each issue.

 

Having said that, the steam boys manage to feed the demand since they (we are told) fill up all the available slots in each publication.

 

So, there is demand from both magazines and exhibition managers, but not enough supply. It would suggest that if you want to make a name for yourself in the hobby, D&E modelling is the way to do it, but you'll need to work hard to find a suitable prototype.

Sorry,it was more than just one at Glasgow. My point was that a substantial portion , if not the majority of layouts, certainly large ones, were modern image at Model Rail Scotland . Just looking at the program I count 16, of which I think only 1 is a TMD. I didn't include steam diesel transition . These are all BR blue and later, and most were a reasonable size.

 

Aberdeen Kirkhill

Allanbridge (Bonnybridge MRC)

Acton Parkway (Halifax MRC)

Allander Bank (Clydeside)

Cadham Bay (Glenrothers MRC)

Calside (Dumfries)

Carron Grove (Falkirk)

Coppell (Furness)

Dunnlakin

Franwood TMD

Georgemas Jct

Hyndford (Clyde)

Newhaven Harbour (Wirral)

Pathhead (Ayr)

Springwood (Stirling)

Maxwell Colliery (Glasgow and West of Scotland)

 

They certainly outnumbered Steam and Transition layouts, so I wondered had there actually been a sea change away from Transition to something more modern. Of course one exhibition is not a representative sample , but most of the newer layouts on the Scottish Circuit do seem to be sectorisation to privatisation . So you've got your 13 a year there , and of course I'm sure there's many more like it around the country. So maybe there is now enough to support a Modern Image Magazine , Certainly a Quarterly one- maybe a Quarterly Rail Express Modeller? And I think it does go to show that steam or steam/transition dominated magazines are not typical of whats out there.

Edited March 5, 2018 by Legend

[Phil Parker]

Sorry,it was more than just one at Glasgow. My point was that a substantial portion , if not the majority of layouts, certainly large ones, were modern image at Model Rail Scotland . Just looking at the program I count 16, of which I think only 1 is a TMD. I didn't include steam diesel transition . These are all BR blue and later, and most were a reasonable size.

 

Sorry, I should have made it clear I wasn't meaning "one layout" literally. It was clear that there were several layouts at Glasgow, it's just that when this topic comes up, we always get single suggestions and I was trying to explain the sheer numbers of model railways the press will get through in a year. 

 

However, even in a heavily D&E biased show, if we take out the layouts that have already been in BRM, there isn't one per issue for a year. That's the problem.  At least Glasgow will help as our contact up there did talk to several owners. That will buy a few months for some concentrated building from the D&E community though. 

[Clive Mortimore]

Sorry,it was more than just one at Glasgow. My point was that a substantial portion , if not the majority of layouts, certainly large ones, were modern image at Model Rail Scotland . Just looking at the program I count 16, of which I think only 1 is a TMD. I didn't include steam diesel transition . These are all BR blue and later, and most were a reasonable size.

 

Aberdeen Kirkhill

Allanbridge (Bonnybridge MRC)

Acton Parkway (Halifax MRC)

Allander Bank (Clydeside)

Cadham Bay (Glenrothers MRC)

Calside (Dumfries)

Carron Grove (Falkirk)

Coppell (Furness)

Dunnlakin

Franwood TMD

Georgemas Jct

Hyndford (Clyde)

Newhaven Harbour (Wirral)

Pathhead (Ayr)

Springwood (Stirling)

Maxwell Colliery (Glasgow and West of Scotland)

 

They certainly outnumbered Steam and Transition layouts, so I wondered had there actually been a sea change away from Transition to something more modern. Of course one exhibition is not a representative sample , but most of the newer layouts on the Scottish Circuit do seem to be sectorisation to privatisation . So you've got your 13 a year there , and of course I'm sure there's many more like it around the country. So maybe there is now enough to support a Modern Image Magazine , Certainly a Quarterly one- maybe a Quarterly Rail Express Modeller? And I think it does go to show that steam or steam/transition dominated magazines are not typical of whats out there.

Plus

 

Canada Street and Friday Bridge. Both are diesel only, or don't green diesels count anymore?

 

[Northmoor]

Utter tosh.

 

If you had been at the Glasgow show where there was a predominance of D&E layouts, many of them big passenger ones, including Aberdeen Kirkhall a passenger rolling stock depot layout you would not have written the above.

 

Clive a D&E modeller who is not young. Has built his own baseboards and the bits on top.

Actually Clive I agree with a great deal of Ravenser's "rant".  You are just one of the exceptions that prove the rule and I'm glad to hear the Glasgow show was so good.  I went to it in '95 and it sticks in my mind as a big disappointment, there were so many collections of diesels parked in diesel depots (it was the height of Lima's Limited Edition phase).

 

I would completely endorse the observation of too much freight, no MU depots and even less, carriage sidings.  I struggle to recall these modelled in any era.  Not that it counts for anything but the plan for half of my loft layout - baseboards built but "St. Davids" needs to be built first - is to be some suburban carriage sidings.  It'll be a lot easier than packing away forty carriages at the end of every running session....

[Legend]

Plus

 

Canada Street and Friday Bridge. Both are diesel only, or don't green diesels count anymore?

Yes fair point . Canada Street was superb. I classified it as a diesel/steam transition period just to underline the point there were a lot more modern image layouts without resorting to including transition period ones. Edited March 5, 2018 by Legend

[Ravenser]

Sorry,it was more than just one at Glasgow. My point was that a substantial portion , if not the majority of layouts, certainly large ones, were modern image at Model Rail Scotland . Just looking at the program I count 16, of which I think only 1 is a TMD. I didn't include steam diesel transition . These are all BR blue and later, and most were a reasonable size.

 

Aberdeen Kirkhill

Allanbridge (Bonnybridge MRC)

Acton Parkway (Halifax MRC)

Allander Bank (Clydeside)

Cadham Bay (Glenrothers MRC)

Calside (Dumfries)

Carron Grove (Falkirk)

Coppell (Furness)

Dunnlakin

Franwood TMD

Georgemas Jct

Hyndford (Clyde)

Newhaven Harbour (Wirral)

Pathhead (Ayr)

Springwood (Stirling)

Maxwell Colliery (Glasgow and West of Scotland)

 

They certainly outnumbered Steam and Transition layouts, so I wondered had there actually been a sea change away from Transition to something more modern. Of course one exhibition is not a representative sample , but most of the newer layouts on the Scottish Circuit do seem to be sectorisation to privatisation . So you've got your 13 a year there , and of course I'm sure there's many more like it around the country. So maybe there is now enough to support a Modern Image Magazine , Certainly a Quarterly one- maybe a Quarterly Rail Express Modeller? And I think it does go to show that steam or steam/transition dominated magazines are not typical of whats out there.

 

 

Sorry, I should have made it clear I wasn't meaning "one layout" literally. It was clear that there were several layouts at Glasgow, it's just that when this topic comes up, we always get single suggestions and I was trying to explain the sheer numbers of model railways the press will get through in a year. 

 

However, even in a heavily D&E biased show, if we take out the layouts that have already been in BRM, there isn't one per issue for a year. That's the problem.  At least Glasgow will help as our contact up there did talk to several owners. That will buy a few months for some concentrated building from the D&E community though. 

 

I think we may be barking up the wrong tree here in focussing on "big layouts".

 

To my observation there are a respectable number of large D&E exhibition layouts around, considering that large exhibition layouts are a small element of layouts as a whole. As LBRJ noted , in a 14-16 layout show he can only accommodate 2 large layouts. That leaves him trying to book 12-14 small and medium sized ones. This will be typical of most shows - for the "medium sized" show you can probably increase all the numbers by 50% or double them - but the ratio of large "centre-piece" layouts to the rest will remain much the same

 

The issue is not really the 15-20% of centrepiece exhibition layouts . There is a cadre of skilled high-end D+E modellers who build such things. The problem in my view lies the other 80% of small and medium-sized layouts . When it comes to D+E they aren't really there. There's a reasonable amount of icing on the cake - but a very serious lack of cake underneath. Half a dozen such layouts a year between the big showpieces would keep D+E ticking over in a magazine .

 

This is where throwing Model Rail Scotland at us as proof that the hobby is full of great D+E layouts that the magazines are failing to publish may actually be evidence in support of some of my earlier comments:

 

 

So you've got your 13 a year there , and of course I'm sure there's many more like it around the country.

 

​But  there aren't . Certainly not in the southern half of the country. And the sight of a Scottish show with lots of Scottish-based D+E layouts from Scottish clubs may be telling us something.

 

​- We hear occasional bleats that the way the Scottish show scene operates tends to favour club layouts and larger club layouts , and squeezes out individual modellers (EG the "show for a show system" or expenses being paid at a flat rate per square foot of layout) . This is likely to favour large club layouts over the smaller privately owned exhibition layouts we see south of Hadrian's Wall. If D+E layouts tend to be big tailchasers, an environment that favours the production of big tailchasers over modest sized privately built layouts will tend to increase the proportion of D+E ("Favourable change of mix" to be technical)

 

​- If I'm right in thinking that a lack of space at home to build layouts is a serious issue, then Scotland should be less affected than most . Population density is much lower than in England, and only recently has the population started rising. Space - either at home or in clubrooms - should be much cheaper and more readily available. In Southern England a lot of D+E modellers find themselves forced to rent on shorthold tenancy - meaning a loft, a garden shed or a permanent layout fixed to the walls becomes impossible. Hence a culture in which building a layout is not seen as a realistic goal and people join a club to get access to the club layout (and the exhibition circuit) to run their trains

 

​- Nearly all the layouts at Model Rail Scotland seem to be Scottish prototype. Nothing odd in that - but it's a fact that Scottish prototypes loom disproportionately large in D+E . Think the umpteen West Highland layouts, the numerous "small ScotRail terminus" layouts, and another genre based on wayside stations on long secondary main lines through sparsely populated country (Think Culreoch, Hazelbank, Blair Atholl towards Drumochdar...). Throw in the Cambrian (as a Welsh version of Scotland), and you've probably accounted for a large slice of the D+E layouts with an identifiable prototype - even interpreting that very generously .

 

An awful lot of the D+E layouts I see in England are very generic , with no identifiable prototype - "Anytown in Gricerland", a continuous circuit layout, or "EveryTOC TMD" which has been criticised already. Often the main objective seems to be to run as many brightly coloured TOC liveries as possible side by side. If you exclude Southern third-rail and LT layouts - which are a very different proposition - there are few layouts based on identifiable settings /prototypes in England. George Woodcock's Towcester and Fenchurch St Peter's are honourable exceptions - you know exactly where you are, what railway you are on and what kind of operation you are watching. Similarly with Dewsbury Midland, Wibdenshaw, and Hornsey Broadway , or P4 New Street. You know  where you are . There is real atmosphere. With the generic fantasies based on nothing in particular on the real thing you don't, and there isn't.

 

​Aberdeen Kirkhill has been cited as an answer to my comments about an MU depot. Firstly - it's not a DMU /EMU depot - it's a coaching stock servicing depot, which is different. Secondly it's the only example of this kind of thing I've ever seen modelled. Thirdly, it's a version of something that actually exists on the real railway . It convinces because it's a real operation. Fourthly - it's awfully big, and if this can be done, and made to handle 8 car rakes then you really can't claim that it's unrealistic to propose modelling a depot handling 3 or 4 car EMUs because of the space required.....

 

​And more cautiously - depots like LN and CA basically handled 2 car DMUs, often 57' short-frame types. That is vastly less demanding in terms of space than Aberdeen Kirkhill. In fact you would probably need something like 50%-100% more space than the typical "generic TMD" to build something compressed but authentic.  That ought to be achievable - far more achieveable than representing places like Tinsley, Toton, Laira , Old Oak, Stratford or even Immingham. There were probably a couple of dozen such prototypes across the country. Something similar still exists

 

​I feel that part of the problem is that we aren't actually looking at the real thing and grappling with how we make interesting layouts out of it. Much easier to start another "ultra-hack" vehicle to display somewhere. 

- 

[Clive Mortimore]

Actually Clive I agree with a great deal of Ravenser's "rant".  You are just one of the exceptions that prove the rule and I'm glad to hear the Glasgow show was so good.  I went to it in '95 and it sticks in my mind as a big disappointment, there were so many collections of diesels parked in diesel depots (it was the height of Lima's Limited Edition phase).

 

I would completely endorse the observation of too much freight, no MU depots and even less, carriage sidings.  I struggle to recall these modelled in any era.  Not that it counts for anything but the plan for half of my loft layout - baseboards built but "St. Davids" needs to be built first - is to be some suburban carriage sidings.  It'll be a lot easier than packing away forty carriages at the end of every running session....

I went to the Caistor show in November and did not have a large all steam layout, in fact it was mainly D&E and most of them good layouts of a variety of types.

 

Doncaster show had a good mix of diesel and steam layouts, many I have never seen in the press or at other shows. There was a wonderful D&E 2mm finescale Minories layout Hallam Town. A great model of Shirebrook, a prototype station, OK it has a loco depot on it but there was one at the real location.

 

D&E modellers are not all TMD noisy planks.

 

I have yet to see a steam based layout of a set of carriage sidings with a wealth of carriage types that ran before the onslaught of DMUs and Mk1 coaches.

[Clive Mortimore]

I think we may be barking up the wrong tree here in focussing on "big layouts".

 

To my observation there are a respectable number of large D&E exhibition layouts around, considering that large exhibition layouts are a small element of layouts as a whole. As LBRJ noted , in a 14-16 layout show he can only accommodate 2 large layouts. That leaves him trying to book 12-14 small and medium sized ones. This will be typical of most shows - for the "medium sized" show you can probably increase all the numbers by 50% or double them - but the ratio of large "centre-piece" layouts to the rest will remain much the same

 

The issue is not really the 15-20% of centrepiece exhibition layouts . There is a cadre of skilled high-end D+E modellers who build such things. The problem in my view lies the other 80% of small and medium-sized layouts . When it comes to D+E they aren't really there. There's a reasonable amount of icing on the cake - but a very serious lack of cake underneath. Half a dozen such layouts a year between the big showpieces would keep D+E ticking over in a magazine .

 

This is where throwing Model Rail Scotland at us as proof that the hobby is full of great D+E layouts that the magazines are failing to publish may actually be evidence in support of some of my earlier comments:

 

 

​But  there aren't . Certainly not in the southern half of the country. And the sight of a Scottish show with lots of Scottish-based D+E layouts from Scottish clubs may be telling us something.

 

​- We hear occasional bleats that the way the Scottish show scene operates tends to favour club layouts and larger club layouts , and squeezes out individual modellers (EG the "show for a show system" or expenses being paid at a flat rate per square foot of layout) . This is likely to favour large club layouts over the smaller privately owned exhibition layouts we see south of Hadrian's Wall. If D+E layouts tend to be big tailchasers, an environment that favours the production of big tailchasers over modest sized privately built layouts will tend to increase the proportion of D+E ("Favourable change of mix" to be technical)

 

​- If I'm right in thinking that a lack of space at home to build layouts is a serious issue, then Scotland should be less affected than most . Population density is much lower than in England, and only recently has the population started rising. Space - either at home or in clubrooms - should be much cheaper and more readily available. In Southern England a lot of D+E modellers find themselves forced to rent on shorthold tenancy - meaning a loft, a garden shed or a permanent layout fixed to the walls becomes impossible. Hence a culture in which building a layout is not seen as a realistic goal and people join a club to get access to the club layout (and the exhibition circuit) to run their trains

 

​- Nearly all the layouts at Model Rail Scotland seem to be Scottish prototype. Nothing odd in that - but it's a fact that Scottish prototypes loom disproportionately large in D+E . Think the umpteen West Highland layouts, the numerous "small ScotRail terminus" layouts, and another genre based on wayside stations on long secondary main lines through sparsely populated country (Think Culreoch, Hazelbank, Blair Atholl towards Drumochdar...). Throw in the Cambrian (as a Welsh version of Scotland), and you've probably accounted for a large slice of the D+E layouts with an identifiable prototype - even interpreting that very generously .

 

An awful lot of the D+E layouts I see in England are very generic , with no identifiable prototype - "Anytown in Gricerland", a continuous circuit layout, or "EveryTOC TMD" which has been criticised already. Often the main objective seems to be to run as many brightly coloured TOC liveries as possible side by side. If you exclude Southern third-rail and LT layouts - which are a very different proposition - there are few layouts based on identifiable settings /prototypes in England. George Woodcock's Towcester and Fenchurch St Peter's are honourable exceptions - you know exactly where you are, what railway you are on and what kind of operation you are watching. Similarly with Dewsbury Midland, Wibdenshaw, and Hornsey Broadway , or P4 New Street. You know  where you are . There is real atmosphere. With the generic fantasies based on nothing in particular on the real thing you don't, and there isn't.

 

​Aberdeen Kirkhill has been cited as an answer to my comments about an MU depot. Firstly - it's not a DMU /EMU depot - it's a coaching stock servicing depot, which is different. Secondly it's the only example of this kind of thing I've ever seen modelled. Thirdly, it's a version of something that actually exists on the real railway . It convinces because it's a real operation. Fourthly - it's awfully big, and if this can be done, and made to handle 8 car rakes then you really can't claim that it's unrealistic to propose modelling a depot handling 3 or 4 car EMUs because of the space required.....

 

​And more cautiously - depots like LN and CA basically handled 2 car DMUs, often 57' short-frame types. That is vastly less demanding in terms of space than Aberdeen Kirkhill. In fact you would probably need something like 50%-100% more space than the typical "generic TMD" to build something compressed but authentic.  That ought to be achievable - far more achieveable than representing places like Tinsley, Toton, Laira , Old Oak, Stratford or even Immingham. There were probably a couple of dozen such prototypes across the country. Something similar still exists

 

​I feel that part of the problem is that we aren't actually looking at the real thing and grappling with how we make interesting layouts out of it. Much easier to start another "ultra-hack" vehicle to display somewhere. 

- 

Yeah it was small it only took 3 x 2car long underframe units on each road, in 4mm that is building 6 feet long before you have anything outside. Longer than Finsbury Park or Tinsley.

[Legend]

I think there is a grave danger of over analysis here Ravenser. Equating the fact that there are larger D+E layouts in Scotland because there’s less dense population up here is tenuous in the extreme . Glasgow , Bonnybridge , Falkirk, Glenrothes are all known for their wide open spaces . Very underpopulated with Haggis roaming in wide open spaces.

 

Mostyn, Tonbridge Yard are two large layouts from darn sarf that I can immediately think of.

[Clive Mortimore]

I think there is a grave danger of over analysis here Ravenser. Equating the fact that there are larger D+E layouts in Scotland because there’s less dense population up here is tenuous in the extreme . Glasgow , Bonnybridge , Falkirk, Glenrothes are all known for their wide open spaces . Very underpopulated with Haggis roaming in wide open spaces.

 

Mostyn, Tonbridge Yard are two large layouts from darn sarf that I can immediately think of.

How could I forget Mr Wade's masterpiece, Tonbridge West Yard has EMU sidings, which no one models according to some. But we cannot count it really because most of Paul's EMUs are MTK kits and "modern image" modellers don't do modelling, so we are lead to believe.