RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 6, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 6, 2016 We were sufficiently relaxed yesterday for a bit of tinkering... But unfortunately Basil's car broke down again! Hee hee Phil 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Enterprisingwestern Posted June 6, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) Sorry Phil. Pedant mode on. It was a red Austin 1100 countryman. Pedant mode off. Looking forward to videos of the weekend. Mike. Edited for the missing 1. Thanks Phil! Edited June 7, 2016 by Enterprisingwestern 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Endacott Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Maybe Basil was seeing red but the car was orange. Geoff Endacott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 6, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 6, 2016 Hee hee Have Oxford made one of those yet???? I don't usually have time for videos at a show - sorry Mike - and Pierre forgot his camera. Others may emerge however But fear not, plans are afoot for another weekend filming session Jimbo thinks we need to include every loco - will be longer than Ben Hur if we do And come back soon - Mr Hanson's leg pulls hurt much more than yours - literally ! See big Jims photo up the thread for explanation Phil 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Sorry Phil. Pedant mode on. It was a red Austin 100 countryman. Pedant mode off. Looking forward to videos of the weekend. Mike. I think it's lost a few c.c.'s in the typing there, mike! [in double-pedant mode!] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold colin penfold Posted June 8, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 8, 2016 he who lives by pedant mode shall die by pedant mode. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopardml2341 Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 he who lives by pedant mode shall die by pedant mode. Shouldn't 'he' have a capital 'H' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 19, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 Fawlty diversions over - for the moment. Thoughts are turning again to phase two ... or perhaps not the phase 2.... Because by building a second phase we are perpetuating the faults with phase 1 ... which as I get older gets heavier! 4 x 4 boards with 10" deep modroc scenery are not light, and the curves from the junction to get under the Oxford line are far too tight to look their best on a main line. And Jimbo thinks the scenery at the southern end looks more like rugged Yorkshire rather than gently rolling Worcestershire. So perhaps a complete rebuild instead? What are the successes of phase 1? Well ... DCC for starters - ECoS has been brilliant, and the single bus connectors between boards have been very reliable As have SMD82 accessory controllers, frog juicers and tortoise point motors. Copper clad sleepers at board ands have also been very robust So these we will perpetuate The lawn is now calling - more thoughts later Phil 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 This is how it works: we all make mistakes. We learn from those mistakes with our next layout, but make a whole raft of new mistakes. And so it goes on with each successive layout! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 19, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 (edited) Spot on SRman... So what are the other problems? Shorts take out the whole layout - no power districts Lack of room in the fiddle yard - not enough roads or room between them to easily take trains on and off What else is good? Operationally our main line train formations are popular The depth of the layout attracts many positive comments regarding perspectives - as does the scenery Coupling loops allow superdetailing on both ends of locos Some other matters are a pain but we will live with... Hornby close couplers are not easy .... but their effectiveness is worth the hassle Likewise removing the signals every time we transport is a pain, can we avoid that I wonder? Anything anyone else who has seen or operated the layout would like to comment on? Cheers Phil Edited June 19, 2016 by Phil Bullock 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PjKing1 Posted June 19, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 OMG has Mike finally worn you down Phil, Abbottswood EM gauge is in the pipe line I'd highly recommend it although you'll have to remortgage to swap all your wheels over!! Seriously though I wasn't expecting this, would you hand build the track in OO? All the best a shocked me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 19, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 Hi Paul Its the weight of the boards that's the main reason.... Will get a plan of thoughts as to how the rebuild could look up before too long... But deff not EM! And probably not hand built track either..... Hope all is good with you? Phil 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted June 19, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 19, 2016 Hi Phil I am reading this correctly, before going down the road of phase two you are considering a new improved phase one and phase two combined? If so a suggestion new boards of narrow width for the railway to be on with lightweight scenic boards attached to them. There are enough natural breaks in the scenery, the railway boundary being one which will help disguise any baseboard joins. You could end up with some odd shaped boards which are a blighter to deal with when traveling. I will not be offended if you say, please engage brain first before typing. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 Hello Phil, If you are sticking with 00 and proprietary then DCC Concepts coming releases sounds just up your junction. Regards, Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 19, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 (edited) Thanks Clive - thoughts most welcome! You are spot on re the odd shaped boards - we already have those on phase 1 at either end of the fiddle yard and as you say they can be awkward Key design factors to be considered are minimising the number of board joins but by definition on a layout this size that's pretty difficult Initial thoughts for the new build are that we will end up with a layout 27 ft x 10 ft. 4ft by 3 ft boards as as standard so a run of 9 front and back with a 4 ft by 2 ft board at either end between the front scenic boards and the fiddle yard boards. The cunning plan then is to bolt together a scenic and fiddle yard board face to face to make a projective box for transport - but nered to be lightweight monocoque construction with integral back scenes - and with deep enough frames to accommodate tortoise motors. Sort of predicts 5mm laser cut ply construction....and separate legs for lightness too Phil Edited June 19, 2016 by Phil Bullock 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 19, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 Heres a rough sketch of initial thoughts REBUILD ROUGH SKETCH.xlsx Phil 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PjKing1 Posted June 19, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 Hi PaulIts the weight of the boards that's the main reason....Will get a plan of thoughts as to how the rebuild could look up before too long...But deff not EM! And probably not hand built track either.....Hope all is good with you?Phil Devastated 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted June 19, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 I can see the sense in what you are thinking, how much of what is the current layout could be incorporated into a rebuilt version? Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 19, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 If we go down this road its just the components Andi.... Phase 2 would work as an add on but we think this would be so much better.... No good for local shows that can only accommodate a 12 ft layout though.... Phil 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted June 19, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 19, 2016 If we go down this road its just the components Andi.... Phase 2 would work as an add on but we think this would be so much better.... No good for local shows that can only accommodate a 12 ft layout though.... Phil so you build two versions of board H4 from your plan... one for the full layout and one for only half of it Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 20, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 20, 2016 Nice thought Andi - will look at that when track plan comes along although gradients and curvature may be limiting factors Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PjKing1 Posted June 20, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 20, 2016 (edited) Morning Phil 27' is huge how big is abbottswood at the moment? Cheers Edited June 20, 2016 by PjKing1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bri.s Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Sounds an interesting project and one I'll be following Can't access the link from my iPhone unfortunately Brian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Weight sounds to be critical May be relatively thin plywood boxes / troughs without any framing and the track placed on the floor of the trough and using the sides for rigidity - like U shaped girder. you might need a few strategically placed over bridges that can disguise strengtheners across the top of the box. I guess you must have access to a medium sized van for transport - or perhaps better still a pallet truck with a tail lift and little trolley for moving things. I shall watch and read with interest. Regards Ray 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted June 20, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 20, 2016 layout is currently 12 x 9 and transports in a LWB transit or similar which I have to hire .... Need to make sure Mk2 version fits in same vehicle! Phil 2 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