Wright writes.....

[Barry Ten]

I thought this short space would be boring, however having seen Dave F's photo's again I think it would be brilliant for atmosphere. Not good as an exhibition layout except for the guess what might appear next and lots of smoke effects maybe?

Probably not interesting enough for a home layout though as the operator would most probably know what was coming next.

Phil

 

As an exhibition layout I reckon it would work well provided there was a wide variety of trains to be fed through, after all quite often at shows you see layouts where there are lots of sidings and loops and yet nothing ever happens on them, just wagons stuck in the same place all weekend while trains run through on the main lines. (There are nice exceptions to this, of course). I'd happily take some nicely modelled, atmospheric urban scenery over a few sidings that rarely get used.

 

For a home layout I reckon it could be equally satisfying if you had lots of fiddle yard space and therefore could keep up the variety of trains, as with Little Bytham. I can only manage six roads on my own layout, though, and even with a few extra trains capable of being swapped on and off with cassettes, it does get a samey, which is why I'm glad of having a couple of sidings to shunt occasionally. If I had bags and bags of fiddle yard space, though, I reckon I'd be quite happy with just a run-through station.

[Poggy1165]

If I remember correctly, Carrington had a signal box and some pretty interesting signals. It depends what the owner wants. Obviously this would not be a shunting layout, but a 'watch the trains go by' set-up. I think if I had the locos, coaches and wagons needed to model Carrington in GC/GN days I should be very far from bored. However, I'd need to be very very rich and the storage sidings would probably fill a covered tennis court.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Poggy1165

[glo41f]

What a fascinating topic this has been!  I just love the concept that we modellers from all over can have the sort of conversation that we may have had in the pub after club night! A huge and diverse set of views all of which are valid and have merit. As I get older, I am coming  around to TW's concept of a prototype station where a representative selection of trains pass by during a "typical" day. Indeed, I have watched the trains at LB and been totally absorbed in the small world thereby portrayed. This last week I was at a friend's house who has an extensive railway which is single track featuring five stations. It is all signalled as it should be and the layout worked well with station crews quietly getting on with running the timetable. Yet even here there is a complete loop so at tea time, trains can circulate to provide pleasure and delight to spectators. Perhaps that is the answer. 

 

I do agree with the contention that many circular layouts for home use may well not be used that much in practice. My own layout though not circular does not get used that much as I am too busy making locos and stock for it so much so that I have far too much but that is where the interest presently lies.

 

I guess that is the real beauty of our hobby. We all enjoy the various facets and long may we continue to do so. Thank you everyone for your stimulating and often contentious views.

 

Martin Long

[robertcwp]

I think the ultimate watch-the-trains-go-by layout could well be Hadley Wood or Ganwick, but just think of the amount of stock and size of fiddleyard you would need. It could be two or four track depending on the era you wish to model.

 

60007_67770_Ganwick_1959 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

60144_Ganwick_up-YorkPull-close_m by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

60108_HadleyWood_KX-York_c1962 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

[Tony Wright]

By the way, one of us is already 'on the ball' with the Leicester Central 'roundy-roundy' layout it seems: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/101312-track-plan-for-leicester-central-gcr-oo/

 

But as you can see, the space requirement is phenomenal! The short cutting I mentioned is something that could be adapted to a small room, side-stepping the issue of hiding the entry/exit lines of the 'roundy-roundy' layout. I forgot to mention that it also contains most of Nottingham Victoria's south signal cabin for added interest.

 

Anyway, I'm sure this topic is "Wright writes" and I can only extend my heartfelt apologies to Mr. Wright for waffling so in his space!

 

Nick

Nick,

 

Please, under no circumstances apologise. 

 

It's the diversity of this thread which makes it so lively.

 

If all I did were just post pictures of Little Bytham or pictures of my work, Then it would be just boring. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[New Haven Neil]

James, I was actually aware of that layout, came across it when building a car float (floating!) for our old G 'scale' US outline layout, 'Los Carr Quays'.  Tremendous pointwork!

[Tony Wright]

My apologies. I missed the bit where you mentioned between tunnels at the south end and thought that you were talking about the dimensions of the whole station, not just the "between bridges/tunnels" approach.

 

In old money, I measured the whole thing at being around 24' long by about 9' wide, to include the station frontage. That is why your dimensions pretty much matched what I had worked out by a factor of x 10. 

 

The scenic break I had thought of for Leicester would have been the tracks disappearing into the girder bridges at each end, with the station end of each bridge modelled but then with a theatre arch obscuring the fact that you couldn't see the whole bridge. I have never tried it but I have seen it done by others and it can be done effectively. The tracks could then curve immediately after that break. 

You make interesting points, Tony. 

 

That of the whole thing being 24' long and curves immediately after the break.

 

I think what some modellers think is that they've got the space to model the 'linear' section of a 'prototype' but then forget that, to have a roundy-roundy, that space has to accommodate the curves. Not only that, if one is not prepared to compromise with regard to, say, cylinder drain cocks and front steps on big locos being in place, then those curves, in 4mm, in my experience have to be near 3' minimum radius. So, 24' can become 'only' 18' or less of scenic section. That's why LB, at 32' long overall, is just a twitch under 15" short on the scenic section. I live with that.  

[Tony Wright]

What a fascinating topic this has been!  I just love the concept that we modellers from all over can have the sort of conversation that we may have had in the pub after club night! A huge and diverse set of views all of which are valid and have merit. As I get older, I am coming  around to TW's concept of a prototype station where a representative selection of trains pass by during a "typical" day. Indeed, I have watched the trains at LB and been totally absorbed in the small world thereby portrayed. This last week I was at a friend's house who has an extensive railway which is single track featuring five stations. It is all signalled as it should be and the layout worked well with station crews quietly getting on with running the timetable. Yet even here there is a complete loop so at tea time, trains can circulate to provide pleasure and delight to spectators. Perhaps that is the answer. 

 

I do agree with the contention that many circular layouts for home use may well not be used that much in practice. My own layout though not circular does not get used that much as I am too busy making locos and stock for it so much so that I have far too much but that is where the interest presently lies.

 

I guess that is the real beauty of our hobby. We all enjoy the various facets and long may we continue to do so. Thank you everyone for your stimulating and often contentious views.

 

Martin Long

As always Martin, many thanks. 

 

I, too, find the topics discussed on this thread extremely interesting and contentious (particularly the latter in my case).

 

My wife and I have just returned from a splendid weekend at the Spalding Show. It was an excellent event and very well-attended. I was there in my capacity as loco-doctor, where, amazingly, I was able to fix most of what was brought to me - including N Gauge and DCC! We raised over £77.00 for charity - the Lincolnshire Air Ambulance and the Children's Ward at Boston Hospital. May I please thank all those who donated, including Mr Duck (though he doesn't yet know it) because I added part of the money for a loco I sold on his behalf (not at the show)? Thanks Phil.  

 

 

 

The winner of both pots at Spalding, the public's and the exhibitors' was The Gresley Beat. Given what's recently been discussed, I find this interesting. Why? Because the Gresley Beat has the work of a professional building builder on it in the form of Geoff Taylor. The structures you see in the two pictures above are his work, paid for, I would think, by the writing of cheques. I think the big difference between the approach of Cliff Parson's and his team compared with he/she who just commissions, is that the professional's input was only part of what they've achieved as a whole. Most of the Gresley Beat and the vast majority of its stock is the work of the team - making things for themselves. Personally, where I get slightly 'twitchy' over 'chequebook' modelling is where the owner does virtually nothing for him/herself, especially, as has happened in my experience, the work is then compared with those who make everything by/for themselves. Hence my point about the likes of Buckingham and Borchester being, to me, far more praiseworthy than just the ability to pay somebody to do the modelling for one. I agree with comments that others have made; top professional work can be inspirational, but let's not forget where the true praise should go. That's my opinion, anyway.

 

The second interesting point about the winner is that it's a roundy-roundy; thus more entertaining, at least with regard to the public(?). Whenever I watched it, there was always something running and it was watched by more spectators at any one time than any other layout there, at least at the times I looked around. Food for thought?  

 

 

 

One other layout at Spalding I found particularly praiseworthy was Hindlow, built by members of the Clay Cross Club. Though other club members have built layouts, this one was the first by a group of four 'newcomers'. It represents the lime kilns in that part of Derbyshire. It's also end-to-end. 

 

 

 

Another one that took my fancy at the premier Fenland show was Ogden Fold, built by members of the S. Hants Club in P4. This is getting on a bit but it captured the essence of an L&Y 'might have been' very well. It, too, is end-to-end. I have to say, whilst I'm great friends with both the Gresley Beat Team and the South Hants Group, the incidences of derailments on GB, even though there were far more trains run at much higher speed than on OF, were far fewer. Again, food for thought? 

 

May I please thank those who bought by latest Deltic book at the Spalding Show, even though I defaced and devalued their copies by signing them? 

 

Finally, may I please thank all those wonderful folk who came up and chatted to me? After a few years of being unable to attend shows, either as a visitor or a demonstrator, the welcome I get on returning is incredibly humbling. There really are some outstanding people in this hobby!

Edited November 13, 2016 by Tony Wright

[APOLLO]

One answer is to model a long shallow curve, or at least a shallow "on scene" curve at each visible end, so each "off scene" sharper curve starts off at an angle - saves a few precious inches.

 

Incidentally, one of my pet hates is any wonderfully constructed layout where the line just disappears through an un camouflaged hole in the scenery. Even if a suitable bridge, tunnel or building is not valid, a few large trees carefully placed would help greatly.

 

Brit15

[St Enodoc]

I thought this short space would be boring, however having seen Dave F's photo's again I think it would be brilliant for atmosphere. Not good as an exhibition layout except for the guess what might appear next and lots of smoke effects maybe?

Probably not interesting enough for a home layout though as the operator would most probably know what was coming next.

Phil

One would hope so.

[Enterprisingwestern]

I thought this short space would be boring, however having seen Dave F's photo's again I think it would be brilliant for atmosphere. Not good as an exhibition layout except for the guess what might appear next and lots of smoke effects maybe?

Probably not interesting enough for a home layout though as the operator would most probably know what was coming next.

Phil

 

A great idea to fit in front of a fiddle yard to mask "the boring bit", unlike Leigh on Sea that some people have used .

 

Mike.

[Mallard60022]

One would hope so.

Well, I knew a chap who had a fiddle yard that could be 'automatic' (oh he did like his trickery gadgets) if he wanted and it  could send random trains out into the 'open'. Obviously not one for strict, 'timetabled' ops, but quite good fun. OK he knew what was back stage but he could have also have had an accomplice who created surprise trains. Sadly he passed away before the game could commence so to speak.

Phil

[Tony Teague]

Tony

Good to see you at the Spalding Show which I greatly enjoyed.

I completely agree on choice of layouts - the scenic modelling of the lime works on "Hindlow" was really excellent, whilst it is hard to fault "The Gresley Beat" as an exhibition layout - there was always something going on, the buildings are inspirational, and there is plenty of variety in the trains modelled.

I talked to a couple of the team working the Gresley Beat and they were each enthusiastic and knew all about the layout, and I'm afraid that this contrasted with Ogden Fold, where the modelling is to an equally high standard, but where very little was moving and something was amiss each of the three times I went back to have a look - trains dividing (twice), derailments (at least twice) and the "hand of god" required too frequently - which is a shame if you are going to exhibit.

Overall, one of the better mid-sized shows; I will be back next year.

Tony

[thegreenhowards]

Tony,

 

With regard to operation of LB (post 12572), I can say that I thoughourly enjoyed operating your sequence. The best bits were watching the procession of wonderful models of scale length trains, and in complete contrast, shunting the pick up goods across your wonderful set of slips. I think I got the hang of remembering to signal the trains by the end of the sequence!

 

One omission that occurred to me on the way home, was that we didn't operate any trains on the M&GN section. Could you weave a couple of moves on that part of the layout into the sequence?

Edited November 14, 2016 by thegreenhowards

[thegreenhowards]

One friend brought some locos he'd bought and tweaked, but they needed a bit more tweaking until all problems of running were (just about) solved. I made new pick-ups for one and added fibre washers to the outer driving wheel axles (on a 2-8-0) to reduce the slop. After that, lovely running, especially after I discovered that one of the live-side drivers was actually insulated. No wonder it had stuttered. He'd fitted two other metal kit-built locos with DCC decoders. Yes, I know mine's only analogue but one kept on 'tripping out' as full power was applied (a bit more than 12 Volts, to be fair). Is this to be expected? Another had a minor short (minor for analogue) where a bogie wheel was just touching the front frames on curves. I cured this by some light filing and a thin smear of expoxy. Great - super running, at full speed as well, until it came to a crossover I hadn't set correctly, and it shorted. After that, no go. Is this to be expected? Have I blown the chip? Have a blown the motor (a Portescap)? My friend is going to investigate at home.

 

This sort of thing convinces me time after time why I'll never embrace DCC. Metal kit-built locos with live chassis seem to be a complete 'no no'. I've run my own locos into that section before the crossover when it hasn't been set correctly and what happens? A short circuit. I say 'What a silly Billy' (or something more expressive), turn of the 'box, set the crossover correctly and there you go. No blown motor, and of she goes again.

 

Andy, please report and let me know. Obviously, I'll put things right if it's my fault, but are chips so sensitive

 

 

Tony,

 

I finally got round to checking out the dead A2/1 over the weekend. I started by removing the chip and trying it on DC. Unfortunately the motor is completely dead - there's just a short circuit and a burning smell when I apply power.

 

I thought the chip was also dead as when I fitted it into the DJH WD 2-8-0 that you tweaked for me, it only moved at snail's pace. However it seems that the CV values had been scrambled, and on reading the manual and doing a reset, it is purring round with 40 wagons in tow! I think this illustrates some of your concerns about DCC, and in particular, mixing the two systems, however, I'm sticking with the dreaded digital for the time being - I'm too hooked on my Deltic (amongst others) with sound to change! And that's apart from all the wiring.

 

The good news is that I have an old (quiet) Portescap to replace the one in the A2/1, however, given my chassis inexperience, I'm anxious about swapping them over. Is it possible to do so, without dismantling the valve gear?

 

Thanks Andy

Edited November 14, 2016 by thegreenhowards

[Jol Wilkinson]

 

Another one that took my fancy at the premier Fenland show was Ogden Fold, built by members of the S. Hants Club in P4. This is getting on a bit but it captured the essence of an L&Y 'might have been' very well. It, too, is end-to-end. I have to say, whilst I'm great friends with both the Gresley Beat Team and the South Hants Group, the incidences of derailments on GB, even though there were far more trains run at much higher speed than on OF, were far fewer. Again, food for thought? 

 

 

Ironically, trains run at speed sometimes tend to derail less than those run slowly. Something to do with momentum?

 

B2B is probably more critical on P4 layouts. It's the first thing we check if a piece of stock derails ad wheels have been known to move an their axles. As they rely on a plastic to steel "interference" fit, it is perhaps not surprising.

[Ray Chessum]

Tony,

 

I finally got round to checking out the dead A2/1 over the weekend. I started by removing the chip and trying it on DC. Unfortunately the motor is completely dead - there's just a short circuit and a burning smell when I apply power.

 

I thought the chip was also dead as when I fitted it into the DJH WD 2-8-0 that you tweaked for me, it only moved at snail's pace. However it seems that the CV values had been scrambled, and on reading the manual and doing a reset, it is purring round with 40 wagons in tow! I think this illustrates some of your concerns about DCC, and in particular, mixing the two systems, however, I'm sticking with the dreaded digital for the time being - I'm too hooked on my Deltic (amongst others) with sound to change! And that's apart from all the wiring.

 

The good news is that I have an old (quiet) Portescap to replace the one in the A2/1, however, given my chassis inexperience, I'm anxious about swapping them over. Is it possible to do so, without dismantling the valve gear?

 

Thanks Andy

You can replace a portescap motor without removing the gearbox from the frames by removing the bolts which hold it to the gearbox sides,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Ray

[thegreenhowards]

You can replace a portescap motor without removing the gearbox from the frames by removing the bolts which hold it to the gearbox sides,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Ray

Thanks Ray, why didn't I think of that!

 

Andy

[Michael Edge]

You can replace a portescap motor without removing the gearbox from the frames by removing the bolts which hold it to the gearbox sides,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Ray

So you can but then you will only be changing half of the moulded bevel gears which is where the noise comes from.

[ScRSG]

So you can but then you will only be changing half of the moulded bevel gears which is where the noise comes from.

And Sod's law will tell you, you can't get at the bottom screw!

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

I finally got round to checking out the dead A2/1 over the weekend. I started by removing the chip and trying it on DC. Unfortunately the motor is completely dead - there's just a short circuit and a burning smell when I apply power.

 

I thought the chip was also dead as when I fitted it into the DJH WD 2-8-0 that you tweaked for me, it only moved at snail's pace. However it seems that the CV values had been scrambled, and on reading the manual and doing a reset, it is purring round with 40 wagons in tow! I think this illustrates some of your concerns about DCC, and in particular, mixing the two systems, however, I'm sticking with the dreaded digital for the time being - I'm too hooked on my Deltic (amongst others) with sound to change! And that's apart from all the wiring.

 

The good news is that I have an old (quiet) Portescap to replace the one in the A2/1, however, given my chassis inexperience, I'm anxious about swapping them over. Is it possible to do so, without dismantling the valve gear?

 

Thanks Andy

Andy,

 

Thanks for the comments about enjoying running LB. 

 

I'll make it a priority to run the MR/M&GNR when you next visit. 

 

Speaking of which, arrange one before too long and I'll install the new motor. Part of the motion will need dismantling but since I was the one who caused the original motor to fail, then that's the least I can do. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Ironically, trains run at speed sometimes tend to derail less than those run slowly. Something to do with momentum?

 

B2B is probably more critical on P4 layouts. It's the first thing we check if a piece of stock derails ad wheels have been known to move an their axles. As they rely on a plastic to steel "interference" fit, it is perhaps not surprising.

Thanks Jol,

 

I'm not entirely sure, from my own experience, whether trains derail less frequently at speed, though isn't it a bit like saying 'you're driving them too slowly' if they do? 

 

Still on with my own experience (contentious as usual), though I've seen some absolutely abysmal running in OO, with regard to derailments I've probably witnessed more on P4 systems. I know that's probably the jinx I put on any layout when I observe it, but Adavoyle, by the late Tony Miles, was one of only two P4 layout I've ever seen where trains ran faultlessly, fast or slow. The other's Eddie Bourne's Cornish terminus. 

 

Anyone who's seen Roy Jackson's EM Retford will testify to the superlative running (of the track, locos and stock - not always the operators!) and that's incredibly complex, as it's the meeting point of two main lines. I've seen some 4mm layouts where the whole thing would fit into a tiny part of Retford, yet derailments, stuttering, jerking and poor running were endemic. One end-to-end layout I saw recently (in OO to be fair) didn't seem to be able to provide a stage where anything could get from the fiddle yard to the terminus (some 24') without stalling or derailing. The fact that it was DCC seemed to exacerbate any poor running problems. I think what concerned me the most was that the operators seemed to accept it. I can only speak personally but if there ever was a derailment on Stoke Summit or Charwelton I immediately investigated it. Invariably it was a loco/vehicle, not the track. So, the offender was immediately taken off and attended to once back home. On the layout in question, an apparent dodgy loco was picked up, looked at, a placed straight back on the track; just to continue on its wobbly, jerky and un-prototypical way.

 

Which leads me to wonder, what's the 'average' modeller's tolerance threshold when it come to what is acceptable running; or should that be unacceptable running? To me it means at least 40 consecutive train movements, many involving very long trains, some at high speed, but also slow-speed shunting backwards and forwards, reversing and so on. All without a single loco/stock/track/electrical/mechanical problem. I'm the operating problem, but I just have to accept that.  

Edited November 14, 2016 by Tony Wright

[APOLLO]

My extensive loft layout is all Peco 100 with insulfrog points. I took great care laying it (all in foam underlay) to avoid kinks, levelness etc and I am generally pleased with running. A couple of locos / stock that give constant trouble (and only a small number) is banned running awaiting "repairs" - usually caused by moved back to backs, sticky wheels etc.usually quick simple fixes.

 

When I laid my double slips into my through terminus I thoroughly tested the throat pointwork by reversing a 12 coach rake of Lima Mk 1's several times - even at high speed doing a "double waggle" (!!) no derailments at all. Great, though later reversing a train of mixed Hornby / Bachmann stock - derailments guaranteed !! I have read since that the Lima wheels have very good factory back to back, and the over large flanges helped. My Bachmann Thompsons were re-wheeled with metal wheels and no further problems. 

 

Don't get me on about my Hornby Pullmans, cant reverse a rake of those with their flimsy couplings on silly swivels !! The wheels on those are OK - you just can't win !!

 

I run most trains at a slow speed, goods trains especially, any derailments are usually my fault not changing points etc, though I occasionally like to put 12 behind a Bachmann Deltic and let her fly !!

 

Brit15

Edited November 14, 2016 by APOLLO

[coachmann]

I think many people just accept poor running and carry on buying more and more locos. To me, appearance and detail count for nothing if model trains look as if they are cobbles instead of rails. Watching locos take a sudden right or left turn at medium radius turnouts is something else that looks daft.

Edited November 14, 2016 by coachmann

[Theakerr]

When I laid my track many years ago I also tested it by running a rake of 10 Lima Mk1s, a rake of the old Hornby Gresleys and a 30 wagon goods train backwards around the circuit.  I too have code 100 and in the 20 years of operation have only really had two problems with the track, both due to not leaving a small gap at rail joints on a curve.