Broadhaven - another route to the Continent

[SteveyDee68]

Back in September 2019, I floated the idea (sorry, terrible pun) of adapting the Minories plan with the goods shed in front of the terminus as a train ferry terminal. In that posting, I referred to the Rev Alan Shone's Wardleworth Lines Committee marine terminus, St John's, which featured a train ferry (albeit in N gauge). So as to make my thoughts clearer, I've copied over various posts and illustrations from the Theory of Minories thread.

 

Firstly, the Minories plan with the goods shed in front of the terminus:

 

Minories plus Goods jpg 

 

St John's, Wardleworth Lines Committee (1974) - note that the terminus is the reverse of the Minories plan:

 

St Johns WLC jpg

 

My badly butchered version of the Minories plan, showing the position of the train ferry instead of the goods shed:

Minories plus Ferry jpg

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for image restoration

[SteveyDee68]

David @Pacific231G responded:

 

"That's a brilliant idea Stevie. Platforms one and two are for conventional boat and local trains while anything, wagons or Wagons Lits, for the train ferry is pulled into "platform three" (which I'd see as a quayside line) from where a shunter moves suitable cuts back to the headshunt whose length is determined by the length of the ferry's  train deck (or how much of it you choose to model."

 

David described exactly what I was thinking!

 

Then @Joseph_Pestell made a comment:

 

"I had missed the part of this thread that suggested a train ferry in place of the goods shed; a very interesting idea but if the ship is at the front one won't be able to see the trains in the station, or not if we are talking something traveling across the English Channel or North Sea. Across the Solent to the Isle of Wight could be an option. Mainly freight with just the occasional passenger vehicle on its way to repair/maintenance."  [Emphasis added]

 

The issue with my butchered Minories plan was that the length of the platforms is not anywhere near to scale - I planned the ferry to be four coaches long on the two tracks in order to hold eight coaches in total, whereas the drawing shows only approx two. Lengthening the drawing to fit the planned boat train into Platform 3 would mean the end of the station platforms would be well beyond the bows of the ship.

 

Having read through all the Theory of General Minories thread, I commented that a commonly recurring issue is that of the reverse curve through the pointwork at the station throat.  It had been pointed out that these can be eradicated if the approach is on a curve as per Paris Bastille, but I had struggled to change the orientation from a curve from E to NE to one from E to SE.  
 

At this point Phil @Harlequin came to the rescue with some pointwork diagrams; as he explained, "...that's the natural lie for a Minories station and the crossovers being combined into the turn across the face of the platforms is what Minories is all about. So it should be very easy to arrange the platform lines to be oriented the way you want, it's just a question of how far you turn"

 

Minories curved png

 

For clarity, he then provided diagrams of the full Minories throat on a curve:

 

Minories Throat png

 

As Phil explained, "The top one gives 12° platform lines and the bottom one uses Large Ys to give 18° platform lines. But note that that's just the initial direction and you can turn in any direction you want after that - which is what CJF did, of course. If you've got room you could use Large radius turnouts and Large Ys in the crossovers to make the formation even smoother and give a different platform angle:"

 

Minories Y png

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for image restoration

[SteveyDee68]

Shortly afterwards, @Pacific231G responded:

 

"If you want to avoid any reverse curves in the pointwork the minumum angle between the platfroms and the approach lines is twice he divergence angle of the turnout (in the case of Peco about 25 degrees) The problem I've found with laying out throats with Streamline is that their slips have an effecive radius about the same as their small radius points. With full length coaching stock that does give a rather excessive throwover between coaches. However, it's simplicity itself to create an equivalent angled throat with simple turnouts with a nominal radius of about three feet."

 

Pacific231G Minories curved jpg

 

The above "are both drawn with PECO medium radius points and for the second I've set the approach curve at 30 inch minimum to see how much space it would require (a somewhat arbitrary figure but a nominal three foot radius for points and a thirty inch curve were the BRMSB recommended minima for OO and H0)  For a clear platform length of five feet the whole thing would fit comfortably into a length of ten foot and that platform length should accomodate a five coach train of Mk 1s with any but the largest steam and almost any diesel or electric locos. There is a reverse curve to platform 3 but the reverse can be separated  by at least eight inches or with a fairly large radius.  The whole thing with its fiddle yard would fit comfortably into  the corner of  a10 ft by 9ft room.'

 

David's diagrams above proved more food for thought (and I would return to the idea of everything on a curve at a later point). He also provided a diagram and information regarding setting out the Minories throat on a straight run using PECO long points, stating that to access the three platforms would need the length of four points:

 

Minories straight and long jpg 

 

David had done a lot of experiments with coaching stock across combinations of pointwork forming the Minories throat, and so I was starting to think that things were moving the right way towards avoiding reverse curves. But then Stephen Lea @Compound2632 posted a warning:

 

"Beware the PECO large radius point. The crossing angle is a bit under 12° and the curve continues beyond the crossing, so that the 12° divergence is achieved at the end of the unit. This leads to trouble:

1. if using a pair "out of the box" to form a crossover at the standard Peco Streamline 2" track centres, there is an unnatural-looking reverse curve between the crossings;
2. if trimming the ends to make a crossover with more prototypical 45 mm track centres, one has to faff about to straighten the rail on the diverging line to avoid a hideous kink;
3. if trying to do the same to make a crossover plus yard access using a single slip, you're sunk because the crossing angles do not line up and that the two "straight" roads cannot be laid parallel."

 

(At this point, I had not physically joined points together or run coaching stock through them, but as I discovered later - having got to the point of thinking I had a suitable plan - two long radius points do throw coach ends out when passing across ... I should have downloaded David's photographs to remind me whilst planning!)

 

Phil @Harlequin had asked me to provide a general sketch of the proposed space for my layout, and so I obliged (eventually!) with the following rough sketches:

 

Rough Sketch Loft jpg

 

Rough Sketch Schematic jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for restored images

[SteveyDee68]

Phil @Harlequin kindly drew up my proposed baseboards, and indicated a seven coach train (to get a sense of scale) -

 

Loft area showing baseboards as per previous sketch: 

 

Basic Boards jpg

 

He then kindly provided a schematic idea for a layout, where he suggested avoiding the lower level storage loops that I had proposed and only having a low level reversing loop instead:

 

Harlequins Scheme jpg

 

 

As Phil said, "I don't think it quite holds together to be honest, but it's food for thought anyway." It certainly did (and still does) and the final plan will probably owe a great deal to this design.

 

At that point, it was suggested I started a new thread to record/discuss the planning of my layout further, and so here it (finally) is!

 

That concludes the "historical" part of the planning for Broadchurch (Marine) Broadhaven, and further updates will be my subsequent playing around planning ideas.

 

With especial thanks at this point to Phil @Harlequin,  David  @Pacific231G, @DavidCBroad,  @Joseph_Pestell and Stephen Lea @Compound2632 for all your discussion, input, ideas and general wisdom, and for encouraging me to continue with this particular idea.

 

HOUR OF FUN

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for restored images

[SteveyDee68]

To continue the story...

 

I started sketching out ideas based upon a Minories style station. Platform 3 (the lowest platform) would be for boat trains/Wagon Lits, with a kickback to a headshunt (four coaches plus barrier wagon plus a shunter long) which in turn would give access to the train ferry. I soon decided to add a short departures only platform off the loco spur, together with a parcels siding, giving four platforms instead of the original three.

 

Plan 1 (first development from the original Minories design)

 

Plan 1 jpg

 

I had already decided that some lines would be 3rd rail and others "off juice" to justify electric, diesel and steam locos. Between Platform 2 and 3 I also added a stabling/carriage siding, and goods loops below the station with a direct link from the inbound line. Of course, having got that far I realised that goods departures had to be shunted into Platform 4...

 

Even at this stage, I think I had moved away from a true Minories station throat...

 

This plan was abandoned even before adding in the ferry itself, as I was unhappy with goods departures.

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for restored images

[Flying Pig]

13 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

As Phil said, "I don't think it quite holds together to be honest, but it's food for thought anyway." It certainly did (and still does) and the final plan will probably owe a great deal to this design.

 

Where do the gradients go to get enough vertical clearance for the reversing loop?  I'd have thought you'd want to make the storage loops level, but that rather constrains things.

 

 

[Zomboid]

Could have dead end storage sidings and the though lines then drop? Rather defeats the point of the reversing loop though.

 

Edit: how about this? Decouple the up and down lines and there's plenty of space for the gradients.

Edited October 25, 2020 by Zomboid

[SteveyDee68]

On 25/10/2020 at 13:42, Flying Pig said:

 

Where do the gradients go to get enough vertical clearance for the reversing loop?  I'd have thought you'd want to make the storage loops level, but that rather constrains things.

 

 

Hi Simon

 

I'm trying to condense down the original (quite lengthy) posts on the Theory of General Minories thread, as there was some discussion around the basic concept put forward by Harlequin, including gradients and also alternative scenic treatments. I think possibly a gentle gradient up exiting from the storage loops bottom right of the plan through to the station throat, with the lines behind the station dropping down once entering the tunnel top right on the plan. Of course, a running line dropping down from a dockside station might be one of those things that 'doesn't quite hold together'...

 

HOURS OF FUN!

 

UPDATE

Whilst typing this up, @Zomboid put up a suggestion for the storage loops/reversing loop that might avoid gradients into the station - again, thanks for some more food for thought! 

Edited June 7, 2021 by SteveyDee68
Responding to Zomboid's post; updated tags

[SteveyDee68]

Further developments with pencil and paper...

 

Plan 2 jpg

 

Back to three platform faces for passenger services, with two parcels/goods sidings off a headhunt from platform 1 road.  The stabling road has gone from between platforms 1 and 2, and the goods loops are accessed via the same paintwork accessing platform 3.

 

 

However, access from the inbound lines is now via the line which was previously the headhunt for the ferry, meaning that departures from platform 3/goods loops is via a diamond crossing onto the outbound line. Moving away from Minories rapidly!

 

Note the second link to the headhunt from the line against the quay, with a short siding off to hold the reach wagon (smudged ink there makes the left hand point look like a diamond crossing!)

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for restored images

[Flying Pig]

50 minutes ago, SteveyDee68 said:

I think possibly a gentle gradient up exiting from the storage loops bottom right of the plan through to the station throat, with the lines behind the station dropping down once entering the tunnel top right on the plan.

 

My point was that gradients are probably the critical point of the scheme.  Rough ideas are only a start - you need to work them out in some detail to avoid finding out too late that there are impossibly steep sections or transitions on curves that derail your stock.

 

FWIW if you do want to put a reversing loop under the station area. I'd suggest a long loop with junctions near the rh end of the storage sidings and the lines descending in front and behind while keeping the main line near to level.  You might even gain enough height difference for a slight down gradient between the junction and the terminus.

[SteveyDee68]

Thank you, Simon, for your thoughts. Currently I am still working out the terminus, but a low level reversing loop would need to be built first, so the overall scheme will be thought about once I have sorted the station. As you say, pretty careful attention will need to be paid to gradients.

 

I'd better finish my station design and then sort out topography!

Edited October 26, 2020 by SteveyDee68
Typos / Removed topography for another post

[SteveyDee68]

The screenshot of modern day Newhaven gives the location of my ficticious "Broadhaven" showing the railway station and ferry berth on the opposite bank to the real Newhaven railway stations. The existing line running northwards is reached via a lifting bridge onto Denton Island before crossing the River Stour (navigation beyond the river railway bridge is via a dredged channel to the west of Denton Island, hence the lifting bridge).

 

The eastern bank is given over completely to wharves and warehousing, served by rail and with the branch to Seaford running through.

 

None of the three prototype Newhaven stations exist in my imaginings, but are replaced by Denton Broadhaven station, just north of the junction to Broadhaven itself. Local services from Broadhaven to Seaford run from

Denton Broadhaven to Seaford, Broadhaven itself being for long distance and ferry/train ferry traffic only.

 

Given the existing topography, that is why in my universe the train ferry is in front of the station. In my fertile imagination, the railway company purchased most of the land around and about, and Broadhaven itself was developed with the ideals of a new town under the watchful eye of a company appointed architect. With tighter controls upon building design in the town the west bank has a genteel quality to the buildings, unlike the Newhaven we know.
 

Workers housing was provided at Denton Island along the same ideals as Port Sunlight, whilst even the dockside warehousing on the opposite bank from the station has been designed with a view to form as well as to function. The railway directors wanted visitors from the continent to have excellent first impressions upon their arrival, and an iron grip upon planning through land ownership resulted in one of the most pleasant looking towns on the south coast.

 

Now to finish planning the station, and cherry picking the nicest looking town buildings in the south of England to create my imaginary town of Broadhaven!

 

HOURS OF IMAGINATIVE FUN

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Updated station names

[SteveyDee68]

Plan 3 (below) is essentially a revision of the previous plan, except that the parcels sidings have been removed from the rear of the station. Also, I introduced crossovers in between Platforms 2 and 3 in order to be able to split multi-EMU services (note that I renumbered platforms in this version from the bottom upwards!)

 

So, Platform 2 could accept e.g. 2 x 4-CEP formation. This could split, and the forward portion exit via the crossover leaving the rear 4-CEP still at the platform. Platform 3 can stable a 4-CEP beyond the crossover, or alternatively that could be used for parcels.

 

A kickback road from the platform 3 road gives access to an EMU stabling shed and carriage sidings, whilst a loco shed and workshops (for the dock shunters) is situated below the head shunt for the ferry and the docks branch.

 

I was feeling quite pleased with the look of this design, until I started plotting carriage storage from Platform 1 (boat trains etc) and realised it was truly convoluted, not to mention that the shunting engine ended up on the wrong end of the carriages! Turdycurses, and back to the drawing board.

 

Plan 3 jpg

 

 

IF AT FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED...

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholder for restored images

[SteveyDee68]

Plan 4 was a transitional design - back to a more "Minories" throat, with goods loops off Platform 4 (yes, back to four platforms) and the first instance of using double slips (albeit not overly clear in the drawing at the start of Platform 4). I then sketched out the goods loops back between the station and the ferry...

 

The feature I liked most about this design was adding the middle road and putting a crossover into Platform 3 to allow splitting of multiple EMUs and providing a stabling road/coach siding at the end of that loop within station limits.

 

Plan 4 jpg

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholder for restored images

[SteveyDee68]

Plan 5 - EUREKA?!

 

I have to admit that at this point I thought maybe I had struck gold!

 

From the top downwards...

 

A parcels platform - off juice - not a passenger platform and therefore not numbered! Parcels arrive Platform 1, and are shunted back out to be placed into the parcels siding, as there is no direct connection to the inbound line.

 

Middle road/loop - 3rd rail - allows a 4-CEP to depart from the end of Platform 1, and a stabling road at the end of the crossover that can hold 2 x 2-BIL/2-EPB/2-HAL or 1 x 4-CEP ... or even a coach or two!

 

Platform 1 - 3rd rail - can handle 2 x 4-CEP or even the same plus MLV! The crossover to the middle loop allows multiple units to split, and either leading or trailing sets depart.

 

Platform 2 - 3rd rail - boat trains (predominantly) - sized for 2 x 5-BEL (!) or Class 71 + 8 pullman coaches + luggage vans (etc).  Accessed by a left hand point from the inbound line and uses a diamond crossing to reach the outbound line - some butchery of PECO points required here! Goods loops (non 3rd rail) also accessed from this line, but no loco release from Platform 2 (more like Minories!). Again, some butchery required to create the diamond crossing at this point.

 

Goods loops below - off juice - although as soon as drawn and inked I saw a better solution!

 

Platform 2, and the lower two goods loops both access the train ferry via the headshunt curving down to the right of the plan, curving in front of two carriage sidings and a three road (two covered) engine facility. A short loco spur for electric locos is above the non-electrified lines, with a trailing crossover onto the inbound line. 

 

 

Plan 4 was a transitional design - back to a more "Minories" throat, with goods loops off Platform 4 (yes, back to four platforms) and the first instance of using double slips (albeit not overly clear in the drawing at the start of Platform 4). I then sketched out the goods loops back between the station and the ferry...

 

The feature I liked most about this design was adding the middle road and putting a crossover into Platform 3 to allow splitting of multiple EMUs and providing a stabling road/coach siding at the end of that loop within station limits.

 

Plan 5

 

At the last moment, I added a quayside siding running below the ferry berth serving fuel bunkers for storing fuel for the ships.

 

I was quite happy with this (with possibly a slight rethink of the goods loops) but this wasn't to scale and I felt needed refining!

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholder for restored images

[Zomboid]

You really need to do that stuff to scale. Pen drawing pointwork is often somewhat optimistic.

[SteveyDee68]

On 27/10/2020 at 22:49, Zomboid said:

You really need to do that stuff to scale. Pen drawing pointwork is often somewhat optimistic.

 

I think you responded before I'd finished writing up my thoughts on Plan 5 - see my last sentence in the above post!

 

I'm very aware of the optimistic pencil phenomena, but whilst doodling away I draw point formations that I hope will make sense with the idea of then working out how those might be achieved using PECO points etc later. I would love to be able to build my own track and achieve the gorgeous flowing point formations as seen on e.g. Eastwood Town (and so not worry about adapting PECO standard products) but I still can't yet solder power feeds onto rail...

 

In the past, I have sketched layout plan ideas on paper and pads and then, when I finally got something I think I could build, I would promptly misplace my drawings and have to start again! I'm posting up the various ideas I had so that I have a record of my thought process. As I go along, I can see where I think I had a good idea, and also where maybe I might have lost one in the process of revision. If I do something glaringly obvious like that, I'm hoping RMWebbers might jump in and say so (or even suggest improvements)

 

I will start planning things to scale shortly using point templates (and also mocking up with real points etc) and thereby discover just how optimistic my pencil has become - my guess is way more than somewhat!! 

 

HOURS OF FUN!

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Corrected the appalling and nonsensical mix of tenses in last paragraph!!

[SteveyDee68]

Plan 6 was an attempt to slim down the previous plan, simplify the pointwork - note a double slip at the start of Platform 3 instead of multiple butchery! It feels more like Minories again, even if it isn't! 

 

Plan 6 jpg

 

Update - And looking at it on screen, I just realised that Platform 1 is only for departures! Only if I added a facing crossover before the first points in the throat - and then we are back to reverse curves!

 

Plan 7 jpg

 

Plan 7 amalgamates features of several previous plans - but back to four platforms! (Why?!)  Platform 1 is only for departures ... and I realised that goods traffic for the warehouse (or platform 1 itself) would block the outbound line. This plan therefore has fundamental issues, although I rather liked the access to Platform 4, reached via the Y points and diamond crossing off the main lines. Once again, however, goods trains would need to be assembled in the platform 4 line in order to depart. 

 

In fact, out of those two plans I think Plan 6 is the better of the two!

 

Update - maybe not! Incoming trains to platforms 2 and 3 only! I only saw simultaneous arrivals to Platform 3 with departures from 1 or 2! Schoolboy error!

 

 

Edited January 28 by SteveyDee68
Placeholders for restored images

[SteveyDee68]

Plan 8

 

3 Platform faces

 

Platform 1 - loco hauled passenger or parcels trains. Access to parcels siding and two coach storage sidings via headshunt off Platform 1 only.

Platform 2 - mainly EMU workings, both longer and shorter formations with the ability to split multiple unit workings.

Platform 3 - boat trains, multiple EMU, loco hauled (electric, diesel or steam) with release to loop line

Goods loops - 3 (in original plan) below loop to Platform 3. Revised to two loops on revision during full size pointwork mock up!

 

Platform 3 is, once again, entered from a slow inbound line doubling as the headshunt for the train ferry, and exits via a diamond crossing directly onto the outbound line. These formations serve both Platform 3 and the goods loops.

 

I tried adding in an MPD below the slow line/headshunt.

 

This design covered two pieces of A4, hence the double scan below, in an attempt to achieve a better sense of scale proportions.

 

The sketch below the plan was for putting together the point templates.

 

What did I learn from this exercise?  That my optimistic pencil had reached the dizzy heights of totally deluded! 

 

The final photograph shows the point templates glued together and laid out to get a sense of the length required for this monster plan ... and the realisation that perhaps Plan 6 was the best solution so far (erm... actually, it wasn't!!), and maybe it was time to try out some planning software!

 

In Post 3, I shared David Pacific231G's plan for Minories on a curve - I was to return to that with my next attempts but using software!!

 

HOURS OF FRUSTRATION FUN!

Edited June 7, 2021 by SteveyDee68
Spelling corrected

[Zomboid]

"The Optimistic Pencil" would be a good name for the pub by the station that your track won't leave any space for. 

[Chimer]

Using the unoptimistic XTrackCad, and medium radius Streamline points, here is the critical bit of the throat in Plan #6, allowing for a 3" wide platform ....

 

 

Best of luck!!

[SteveyDee68]

Perhaps I should swap to N gauge? 

 

Noooo!!! 

 

Thank you, @Chimer, for the XTrackCad of the pointwork (I assume that is a Windows program?) As it happens, I'd printed out PECO point templates and been busy sticking that particular formation together using medium radius points! (I've been running coaches through long radius points, and crossovers really do throw the coach ends apart, as pointed out/warned by Stephen Lea (Compound 2632) earlier!)

 

Previously I had also put together the point formations for Plan 8 using templates ...  it was doing that brought home just how optimistic my optimistic planning pencil had become!

 

I've yet to post up Plan 8 as it was two landscape A4 pages, and I am still trying to work out how to combine the A4 scans into one image, as it doesn't work in two parts!

 

Meanwhile, I have been doing some real modelling (shock horror) in that I have a small length of track I use for running in locos which I decided to 'scenify' using the Scalescenes Railway Works as free in Hornby Magazine a while ago. (Or rather, a colour photocopy of the same!) Of course, my test track is 50cm long, and the works is 53.5cm long, so some pruning and other jiggery-pokery has been involved!

 

HOURS OF FUN!

 

PS

I rather like The Optimistic Pencil as a pub name! However, I think it better suits a bohemian little wine bar in the artistic quarter!

Edited June 7, 2021 by SteveyDee68
Updated tags

[Zomboid]

8 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

I rather like The Optimistic Pencil as a pub name! However, I think it better suits a bohemian little wine bar in the artistic quarter!

It is a bit Shoreditch isn't it? It only sells "craft ale" for £12 a pint, and the only food available is inexplicably breakfast cereal. The adjacent bicycle rack is full of single speeders...

 

You get the idea.

[Chimer]

10 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

Thank you, Chimer, for the XTrackCad of the pointwork (I assume that is a Windows program?)

 

There are versions that run on Windows, Macs, and any number of other weird platforms that only true techy geeks recognise.  It's free and unlimited, and can be downloaded from here ..

 

http://xtrkcad-fork.sourceforge.net/Wikka/HomePage

 

I am a fan (many on here are not!)  The basics that will get you started are covered reasonably well in the tutorials also accessible from that page.  It can also do a whole host of vastly clever things which are not very well documented, and is getting cleverer by the minute with a new release in late beta stage development.  I got to around second base within weeks, third base within a year and am still learning new tricks 6 years on!

 

If you do want to give it a go, the first thing you need to know is that to find the Peco track libraries you need to define the scale of your plan to be HO not OO .....

 

Cheers, Chris

Edited October 30, 2020 by Chimer

[SteveyDee68]

1 hour ago, Chimer said:

 

There are versions that run on Windows, Macs, and any number of other weird platforms that only true techy geeks recognise.  It's free and unlimited, and can be downloaded from here ..

 

http://xtrkcad-fork.sourceforge.net/Wikka/HomePage

 

I am a fan (many on here are not!)  The basics that will get you started are covered reasonably well in the tutorials also accessible from that page.  It can also do a whole host of vastly clever things which are not very well documented, and is getting cleverer by the minute with a new release in late beta stage development.  I got to around second base within weeks, third base within a year and am still learning new tricks 6 years on!

 

If you do want to give it a go, the first thing you need to know is that to find the Peco track libraries you need to define the scale of your plan to be HO not OO .....

 

Cheers, Chris

 

Many thanks for this info, Chris - I had been playing with a trial version of some Mac OSX software that limits you to 50 items before stumping up £40 ... not really enough to decide whether it is worth the investment!

 

I shall download the software and give it a go over the weekend, between job applications and finishing the Loco Works photo plank test track thing!

 

HOURS OF FUMBLING FUN!