Annie's Virtual Pre-Grouping, Grouping and BR Layouts & Workbench

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

3 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

There's an area of Sydney called Wooloomooroo.  Where else in the world is there a name with the same pair of vowels repeated four times?

 

Jim  (graduate of GLGW?)

 

It's actually Woolloomooloo .......

[Caley Jim]

16 minutes ago, Malcolm 0-6-0 said:

 

It's actually Woolloomooloo .......

My apologies, Malcolm.  C-nile virus again!

 

Jim

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

7 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

My apologies, Malcolm.  C-nile virus again!

 

Jim

 

No need to apologise - the real spelling is even more strange than your misspelled version. I suspect it's aboriginal for "can't decide between beef or mutton tonight"  

[Annie]

The internet went down here for around 24 hours so I worked on the 1925 MRN layout to pass the time.  I got an amazing amount done so perhaps I might have to declare 'no internet' days from time to time so I can catch up on projects.  I fell asleep and forgot to take pictures so here's picture of a 4ft 6in tank engine shunting instead.

 

 

I need some 3 plank drop side wagons so I bodged around my recent artwork for L&Y 3 plankers and came up with these.

 

 

 

[Jol Wilkinson]

On 19/10/2020 at 10:48, Annie said:

Well I decided I would go with 'Misnomer', 'Malaprop' and 'Dogberry' for station names with 'Misnomer' being the large posh station with the grand over roof.

 

I'm at the detailing stage with the layout which is a task that takes a lot of time to do, but one that I enjoy doing despite it being a fiddly job at times.

 

The station building at Malaprop is a very old Trainz model based on West Ewell.  I've deliberately used buildings from the early days of the trainz simulator because they seem to be a good match for tinplate buildings from the 1920s.

 

 

The station buildings at Dogberry are also from the early days of Trainz.  These ones are in their LNER guise, but they were also available as GWR station buildings.

 

 

 

 

The station at 'Misnomer' is possibly a bit too grand for the size of the layout.  I have wondered about extending the line at platform 3 (next to the parcels bay) out through the end wall of the station and onwards to a fiddle yard.

 

 

 

The LNWR, ever watchful of cost, probably wouldn't have built such a large station for just two or three platform lines. The cost of land involved would, in an urban location, have been excessive for the potential passenger revenue.

 

This photo of the  London Road 4mm layout is, while still fictional, probably more akin to what they might have built.

 

 

[Annie]

1 minute ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The LNWR, ever watchful of cost, probably wouldn't have built such a large station for just two or three platform lines. The cost of land involved would, in an urban location, have been excessive for the potential passenger revenue.

 

This photo of the  London Road 4mm layout is, while still fictional, probably more akin to what they might have built.

 

 

What a lovely picture.  

 

I went with a station with an over roof as that was what the original 1925 layout had, but after that the LNWR invaded and took my layout over.   I hadn't given much thought to what engines and rolling stock I was going to run on the layout but with its tight curves the LNWR 2-4-2 tank engines proved to be ideal.  Most of my LNWR engines and rolling stock live in my digital trainset box and never see the light of day so it was a good opportunity to get some of my collection out of the box and onto a layout

[Northroader]

Mind, look at some of the big junctions, say Rugby, and the LNWR did spread themselves out, and with a big roof to keep folks dry.

[Jol Wilkinson]

28 minutes ago, Northroader said:

Mind, look at some of the big junctions, say Rugby, and the LNWR did spread themselves out, and with a big roof to keep folks dry.

Rugby Midland, as the LNWR station was known in later years, was an example of an island platform with the station building in the centre and two twin line bays at each end. Hence it's great overall platform width and the size of the overall roof. It was my home station in my teenage years.

 

The excellent WarwickshireRailways.com site has some super period photos, including many showing station "fittings" which are of great use when detailing a period model.

[Compound2632]

On 19/10/2020 at 17:43, AdamsRadial said:

Well as we're onto place names I'd better add Loughborough, pronounced "Loogah-Baroo" by a friend from Sydney

 

Looga-barooga, I was told?

 

On 19/10/2020 at 23:20, Edwardian said:

That's really no way to speak about the Loughborough College of Sport & Meccano.

 

Indeed. I went on a residential Laser Safety Officers' course there quite a while ago now. Excellent food.

 

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Rugby Midland, as the LNWR station was known in later years

 

Yah boo!

[Edwardian]

25 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Indeed. I went on a residential Laser Safety Officers' course there quite a while ago now. Excellent food.

 

 

The quick version:

 

"Welcome Class. Don't point them at people. Now, what's for supper?"

 

 

2 hours ago, Annie said:

What a lovely picture.  

 

I went with a station with an over roof as that was what the original 1925 layout had, but after that the LNWR invaded and took my layout over.   I hadn't given much thought to what engines and rolling stock I was going to run on the layout but with its tight curves the LNWR 2-4-2 tank engines proved to be ideal.  Most of my LNWR engines and rolling stock live in my digital trainset box and never see the light of day so it was a good opportunity to get some of my collection out of the box and onto a layout

 

Do please keep the overall roof; it's part of the ethos of those 'system' layouts.

 

If you want a precedent for big glass roofs with limited platform capacity (just 2), try Alnwick, 1887, on the NER.

 

However, I really don't see why it can't be LNWR. 

 

Rugby as mentioned ...

 .

 

Oxford Rewley Road

 

 

Manchester Exchange

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 21, 2020 by Edwardian
spelling!

[Annie]

24 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Do please keep the overall roof; it's part of the ethos of those 'system' layouts.

 

Of you want a precedent for big glass roofs with limited platform capacity (just 2), try Alnick, 1887, on the NER.

 

However, I really don't see why it can't be LNWR. 

Oh the over roof will be staying James.  Apart from the fact that I like it  I spent absolutely ages getting it all properly and neatly in place, - so after doing that it will definitely staying.  I agree too that having one important station with an overall roof on this type of 'system' layout is a defining feature which simply must be present if not absolutely compulsory.

I did consider putting in a fourth platform track, but the problem with doing that would be trying to feed all the tracks through under the iron railway viaduct.  Just getting three tracks under it involved an awful lot of frowning on my part.  And as well as that the extra platform track would be largely unused since the two other stations on the layout couldn't generate enough passenger traffic to make full use of it.

 

Edit:  And thank you very much for the wonderful pictures.  The LNWR will be staying.  After digging around and seeing how much I had in the way of LNWR rolling stock I decided that it needed a home to call its own.

 

 

Edited October 21, 2020 by Annie
more to say

[Annie]

Precursor tank engine under test in my secret virtual model railway room.

 

 

 

 

The result of all that playing trains serious testing is that my rebuilt version of the old Precursor tank engine model has now been accepted and approved for upload to the DLS.

 

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

I envy your ability to keep carpet fluff out of the mechanism ............ 

[Jol Wilkinson]

Annie,

 

my knowledge tends to be limited to locos in LNWR condition but the safety valves look to be rather far forward. They were positioned nearer to the cab so that the "actuating lever" reached back to the front spectacle plate. The LNWR period lever was also a bit longer. 

 

The attached photo from London Road Models gives some idea.

[Annie]

3 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

my knowledge tends to be limited to locos in LNWR condition but the safety valves look to be rather far forward. They were positioned nearer to the cab so that the "actuating lever" reached back to the front spectacle plate. The LNWR period lever was also a bit longer. 

 

The attached photo from London Road Models gives some idea.

The digital model isn't my own work, but a very old model made for Trainz almost a decade ago now.  I know it's not the best, but after having work done on its textures as well as changing its wheels out for something better it's an improvement over how it was before.

I'm not able to do 3D modelling so this is about all I'm able to do with this old Precursor tank engine unfortunately.  That photo from London Road Models is really lovely.

 

[Annie]

No 6781 working on Lickey.  One of the reasons for running this engine on my test track with a heavy train of coaches in my virtual model railway room was to sort out its engine spec.  The original unrebuilt locomotive model had an engine spec that was just too good for a power class '2' engine and after playing trains doing some serious testing I've been able to find one that is a far better match and makes the Precursor tank engine sound better and respond in a more believable way to different load and running conditions.

 

 

 

 

Edit: Precursor tanks at work.

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrbns_lms493.htm

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrbns_lms478.htm

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrbns_pg1939.htm

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrcov282.htm

Edited October 22, 2020 by Annie
Added links

[Jake The Rat]

10 hours ago, Annie said:

 

The result of all that playing trains serious testing is that my rebuilt version of the old Precursor tank engine model has now been accepted and approved for upload to the DLS.

 

 

Is there any chance you might do the same with the Precursor tender engine?

 

 

My 'Euston-Crewe-Liverpool' project is making slower progress than expected. I have 2 problems. The first is my work style, which is more like a way of toying around with things. I build something, then I don't like it, tear it down & build something else; or I build something here & something there, & then I find out that I can't make it fit together... you get the picture.

My 2nd problem: I read too much & watch too many videos. After reading this

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/model-railways/liverpool-lime-street-in-em-gauge/

& watching this

 

...I decided to totally rebuild the station named 'Liverpool'. It will still have only 4 tracks (instead of 11), but there will be no trackwork behind the station, & the approach tracks will lead through a tunnel with several interruptions, with streets & houses above. This is fun to build, but not easy, at least not for me...

 

Theoretically I have worked out a system of 1 platform, 2 trains & 4 locos (the 4 available Claughtons) to run continually between 'Euston' &  'Liverpool'; & then I could do the same on platform 2 with 4 'Alfred the Great' class &/or Precursor tender locos.

Now all I have to do is make the AI drivers buy into my plan, which will certainly be the harder part.

 

Question to Annie: what did you use as station building at Euston? It looks similar to 'Station Saint Cloud', but not quite the same.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Jake The Rat
Me fail English? That's unpossible! ^^

[Annie]

8 minutes ago, Jake The Rat said:

Question to Annie: what did you use as station building at Euston? It looks similar to 'Station Saint Cloud', but not quite the same.

Regency Base 1  <kuid:225064:4010962>

Regency Door   <kuid:225064:4010963>

 

It's not one building Jake, it's five buildings joined together and sunk into the ground to the second floor level.  I did look at using 'Station Saint Cloud' and even used it initially, but it has strange mesh issues with parts of the model disappearing at a distance so I deleted it and used the Regency houses instead.

 

16 minutes ago, Jake The Rat said:

Is there any chance you might do the same with the Precursor tender engine?

I did take a look at the tender engine over a year ago now and gave up on it, but after repairing the tank engine I think I might have another try at doing something with it.  I like the Precursors and it's a pity the last one,  25297 Sirocco, wasn't preserved in 1949.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Jake The Rat said:

...I decided to totally rebuild the station named 'Liverpool'. It will still have only 4 tracks (instead of 11), but there will be no trackwork behind the station, & the approach tracks will lead through a tunnel with several interruptions, with streets & houses above. This is fun to build, but not easy, at least not for me...

That is quite some ambitious plan Jake.  I wanted to keep the old 1925 'system' layout reasonably true to its origins, but doing something later as a larger scheme is certainly a possibility.  I've done some multilevel layouts in a small way and they are always a wee bit of a challenge, - especially where many spline assets are being used.  The 'Undo' button is definitely your friend during such projects.

 

46 minutes ago, Jake The Rat said:

My 2nd problem: I read too much & watch too many videos. After reading this

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/model-railways/liverpool-lime-street-in-em-gauge/

& watching this

I'll have a look at the video and link reference later on, - they do look interesting though.

[Annie]

The next candidate for a rebuild.  This Precursor tank engine is by the same maker, but I haven't had a look at how the textures are put together yet so I'm not sure how difficult it's going to be to sort them out.

 

[Annie]

[Annie]

I'm not at all sure about this old Precursor tank engine model.  I've done about the best I can with it, but it's still not that good.  The 'L&NWR' lettering, the number plates and the lining are 3D meshes fitted almost flush with the main body mesh which is a really strange way of doing it and I've not seen it done this way on any other locomotive model made by other 3D modellers for Trainz.  Basically that means that I can do little with them except make small adjustments to colours, but that's all.  Even the 'O' gauge tinplate models of Precursor tanks from the early 1920s were better than this.

 

 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Annie
can't spell for toffee

[DonB]

Daft question : 

Can you change the "wall paper " in your virtual railway room ?

[Annie]

23 minutes ago, DonB said:

Daft question : 

Can you change the "wall paper " in your virtual railway room ?

I most certainly can Don.  I'm working on some Victorian and Edwardian wallpapers for model railway rooms so over time you'll see the wallpaper change depending on what I'm working on.

 

In the pursuit of Blackberry Black.  I think I'm getting somewhere now.

 

 

I'm more or less happy with the colour densities/shading/& etc now, but the next thing to get right is the reflectiveness/shininess of the surfaces on the locomotive.  No.528 is set at 10% and No.1714 is set at 5%.  Too much shine will wash out the texturing.  In most cases less is more when it comes to shininess.  The original model had very dark texturing and shininess set at 100% (!!!!!!) which didn't do it any favours at all.

 

 

It's LNWR week at Carpeton MPD.

 

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, DonB said:

Daft question : 

Can you change the "wall paper " in your virtual railway room ?

 

Careful what you wish for ...

 

[Florence Locomotive Works]

2 hours ago, Annie said:

I most certainly can Don.  I'm working on some Victorian and Edwardian wallpapers for model railway rooms so over time you'll see the wallpaper change depending on what I'm working on.

 

In the pursuit of Blackberry Black.  I think I'm getting somewhere now.

 

 

I'm more or less happy with the colour densities/shading/& etc now, but the next thing to get right is the reflectiveness/shininess of the surfaces on the locomotive.  No.528 is set at 10% and No.1714 is set at 5%.  Too much shine will wash out the texturing.  In most cases less is more when it comes to shininess.  The original model had very dark texturing and shininess set at 100% (!!!!!!) which didn't do it any favours at all.

 

 

It's LNWR week at Carpeton MPD.

 

Annie, would you mind if I partially copied your engine shed track plan for my coarse scale garden railway? By the way, your Precursor is looking better than some Bing ones I’ve seen! 

Edited October 23, 2020 by Florence Locomotive Works