dibateg Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 The buildings immediately set the scene, nice to see. Do you still have them Clem? Regards Tony Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted October 17, 2014 Author Share Posted October 17, 2014 The buildings immediately set the scene, nice to see. Do you still have them Clem? Regards Tony Cheers Tony, Yes the up-side waiting room is scratch built and can in fact be seen in the background of the third present day photo. The signal box is the Prototype Models kit of Stamford GN box and can be seen in the first and fourth present-day photos. The bridges were also Prototype models products too based on Great Central London Extension bridges. The waiting room will be used on the new layout but the signal box is a bit long in the tooth now and being a card kit it has warped a little (compare it with the 1981 photos when it just been built). I placed it on the new layout as a placeholder for where the new signal box will go to give me the feel of how it will look. I've recently be in touch with the person who was Prototype Models - Ian Wilson - and he is now Pacific Models producing BR Steam engine front number plates and coach destination boards amongst other things. Prototype Models card kits were another oasis of realism in the 1980s. My main station buildings in the 1981 layout was Prototype's model of Heckington Station on the Barkston-Sleaford line. Again I intend to scratch build the main station buildings of the new layout. Best Wishes Clem Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold farren Posted October 18, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 18, 2014 The layout looked very promising shame it was never finished. One question springs to mind what made you go back to em after working in P4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted October 18, 2014 Author Share Posted October 18, 2014 The layout looked very promising shame it was never finished. One question springs to mind what made you go back to em after working in P4. Hi Farren. That's a $64,000 dollar question! The short answer is time and operational needs. I'm building a large-ish layout and EM allows me to easily convert rolling stock without springing each vehicle. Also, on my last P4 layout, even after weighting all the wagons, I found I couldn't reliably back a train of 20+ wagons over points and single slip into sidings without derailments. This probably says a lot about the standard of my workmanship but I felt that for the layout I'm building at the moment, EM was the best compromise. And that has been born out so far in its operational reliability. I still spring or compensate my locos where possible for better current collection, though. I could expand on this but it would only turn into a long meaningless ramble. The bottom line is that every modeller has a set of requirements and limitations - even if they don't know it - that determines the standards they use. I love the look of P4 and for a small layout I would definitely consider it again. But for my present layout, it's EM. Best Wishes Clem Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold farren Posted October 18, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 18, 2014 Thank you for such a honest answer. I did not realise that all stock needed to be sprung. And after all the time taken to weighing them re-wheeling etc only to have running issues would have been enough to send me running for the hills. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted October 18, 2014 Author Share Posted October 18, 2014 Thank you for such a honest answer. I did not realise that all stock needed to be sprung. And after all the time taken to weighing them re-wheeling etc only to have running issues would have been enough to send me running for the hills. To be honest if there was another standard close to P4 where the wheel depth and gauge were the same but where the wheel flanges were equivalent to EM tolerances, that would have suited me perfectly. Unfortunately, the last thing the hobby needs right now is yet another set of standards for 4mm. The small suppliers would be up in arms! This argument has already run and I'm absolutely not writing this to re-open it but in truth it would have been my chosen solution if I ruled the world. Having said that, I must emphasise that I love modelling in EM and views looking along the track look really good when the trackwork has been ballasted and weathered well. As far as P4 goes, propelling stock seems to be the big test. If you have a layout were most trains are pulled and shunting doesn't involve propelling more than about 10-15 wagons, it's not that difficult to get pretty good reliability as long as you build good true pointwork. It just didn't suit my personal requirements for my layout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EHertsGER Posted November 26, 2021 Share Posted November 26, 2021 On 30/09/2014 at 17:26, Horsetan said: I can top that. I've had a DJH BR Std.5 half-completed since 1991.... Peter K Little Sharpie c1988, Riceworks E22/J65 since 1989. I have, however, finished a great many more since… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now