ECC Wheal Imogen / Rosevean Station: the expansion

[The Fatadder]

I lied when I said I was done with Class 37s for now.  I spotted earlier that both EWS locos were missing their nose aerials, so both were drilled and fitted with nickel silver wire painted black.

While I was at it the missing lamp irons on one end of 668 were also fitted (using some Vitrains parts I had to hand).

 

 

with that done I also noticed there were no jumper cables on 025.  I picked up a pack of West Hill Wagon Works printed end details at Showcase, so the multi working sockets have been painted and fitted.  Not confident about their strength, but if the wire brakes I will try drilling out and replacing with wire (which gives me an idea for a bit of cad work).  Visually they are an improvement over the crude original Bachman parts, but not quite up there with the latest model

[The Fatadder]

Yesterday I was shuttling 37668 up and down the layout for a final test and the squeaking from the motor had returned.    Previously (before starting the respray) I had dismantled the chassis and tracked the noise down to pressure on the motor from a poorly made chassis block / keeper plate resulting in the keeper plate not fitting correctly (and instead putting pressure on the motor when the chassis frame is fitted.

 

I thought I had fixed it removing the flash and reassembling, but upon testing the noise had returned.  Remembering the chassis was a pain in the backside to work on thanks to the bogie chains, I initially tried to loosen the keeper plate from underneath the loco after removing the fuel tanks.  (these needed refitting with a better alignment anyway.)

This didn't solve it, so again the model was dismantled (keeping the bogies in situ), the keeper was removed and the location lugs on the damaged side removed completely.  after screwing back onto the chassis the noise had gone, however once the bogies were refitted the noise came back slightly quieter than before.

 

So this time it was completely taken apart with the bogies fully removed (including removing the chains), before stripping them down and reassembling one at a time.  This time the noise has fully gone,  I think the second noise was originating from a cardan shaft that had been fitted the wrong way round in the factory.  Which would explain why bench testing of the motor with no bogies attached the noise was gone, only to reappear the second it went onto the layout.

 

The loco now needs to be reassembled (including the fuel tank modifications outlined here and the loco will finally be done.   (At least until I do something about the sound quality).  A few repairs are needed after all of this handling, (a bit of lifted reflective stripe transfer and a missing nose aerial) plus regluing those dammed brake chains!)

 

  While the fuel tanks are off the model I am going to have a quick look I am going to have a quick look over the mouldings in comparison with my 3d pint to see if there are any worth while improvements before I print new tanks for 710 and 065 which I think are the only 37s I have left that dont have the upgraded underframe

 

Finally a new arrival, with a reasonably priced Bachmann Polybulk arriving from ebay this morning.  This needs to be updated with CAIB logos and channel tunnel branding before weathering along with the grey CAIB wagon once I have some data panels for the latter.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 26 by The Fatadder

[The Fatadder]

More testing this evening and after 5 or 6 runs back and forth running silently the noise has already returned 

 

Wish I knew what the actual cause was almost as much as I regret not sending the damed thing back to Bachmann to fix!

[The Fatadder]

Next step on the 37 looks like a case of dismantle everything (for a third time) and try lubrication (worm bearing and drive draft ends being the key areas I think). For now I will live with it, probably until the run up to its next show.

 

this evening instead I’ve moved into my 158.  Which has sat awaiting wiring for far too long.  This unit was previously rebuilt with wipac clusters behind the window as per the prototype rather than Bachmanns twin led.  But they’ve never been wired up (not helped by a lack of fine wire.)

 

the plan is to use the Bachmann 2 pin connectors between the coaches  to give a wire for the headlight/marker (day), rail lights and cdl lights.
 I can’t recall if the cdl lights on both sides light up on a 158 on the prototype, but from a model perspective I think it’s useful to have both sides lit at once as the public will only see the live side and I can see the other side to show I’ve got them on!)

For the CDL lights I’ve used the Hurst lenses glued over a hole drilled in the side.  I have no idea as to the source of the small LED (they are from a 20 year old loco lighting kit I’ve never used), soldered to a resistor and wires.  now to repeat the process on the other coach before wiring it all up!

 

 

Initially it will get one of my old Lenz golds, although in time it needs something with 6 functions in order to give independent control of tail lights in the event that working couplings are fitted.   It won’t be a regular performer on the layout.  

 

given the success of this trial, I will now need to source more of the small LED and perform the same upgrade on my 150/153.  Annoyingly I don’t think Bachmann included a spare pin on the electric coupling so will need to find a way of getting power across to the second coach on the 150.

[The Fatadder]

I still cant decide over the potential extension for the layout, on one hand I think it will add a lot more interest when operating, on  the other its current length makes exhibiting it very easy, and I just cant get to a track plan I am entirely happy with.

 

The problem comes from the curve of the branchline, if I had been building it as an 8ft layout from the outset Id have continued that curve along the whole layout.  However with the 4ft length I wanted to keep the track exits parallel to simplify the fiddleyard.    

The first iteration of the extension plan really didnt look right with all the track running parallel with the baseboard edges.

 

So instead I have been working this evening on a potential alternative, adding a similar curve the other side or the bridge narrowing the gap between the branch and the yard.  My thinking is that it would originally have been a bay platform that has been downgraded.   I have also tried to design the extension so it could be operated as a standalone layout.   The rear could make use of the other building that was left over from Blackcomb, or a simpler arrangement of trees etc.  Buildings / trees would be used to obscure the right hand fiddleyard exit.  The board could be 4ft or 5ft, the extra ft on the right hand side would give the buffers at the end of the headshunt and the rest of the platform.     If I do go through with this I think I would also need to add a 12 inch extension to the left hand fiddleyard so that both are the same length, as with the extra space on the branch it would be good to add a couple of extra wagons to a through train.

 

[The Fatadder]

A little more research over lunch today shows that Luxulyan was originally a single bay platform (accessed as far as I can see by walking across the track).  Which pretty much settles it from a design point of view, although by the late 90s the second track on the lower side of the platform is long gone.  The main area of potential refinement  to the plan will be on the right hand side, ideally I'd like to keep it at 4 ft as it will make transport (and storage) a lot easier.  which leaves a question as to whether there will be enough room to end the headshunt on scene or if it will have to continue off board.  Ideally if ending on scene it will need some bushes or something to help brake up the joint between baseboard and backscene.   The next step will be printing off a full Templot plan to do some mock ups with buildings / rolling stock and get a better idea how its looking.   At this rate I am seriously thinking about getting the baseboard ordered and getting started (though I probably ought to get a bit more done on Brent first)...

 

 

A question to exhibition managers, 

Would the extension to the layout make any difference to the desirability for bookings having 8ft  scenic + 8ft of fiddleyards vs the current situation of 4ft scenic + 8ft of fiddleyard?

While the layout was well received at its two shows last year, and I was given something like 4 verbal invites for 24/25 nothing has materialised, which has me wondering if the relative scenic - storage ratio is counting against it.   (With the thought that extending the layout so it is 50:50 scenic to fiddleyard might make it more appealing).

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, The Fatadder said:

A little more research over lunch today shows that Luxulyan was originally a single bay platform (accessed as far as I can see by walking across the track).  Which pretty much settles it from a design point of view, although by the late 90s the second track on the lower side of the platform is long gone.  The main area of potential refinement  to the plan will be on the right hand side, ideally I'd like to keep it at 4 ft as it will make transport (and storage) a lot easier.  which leaves a question as to whether there will be enough room to end the headshunt on scene or if it will have to continue off board.  Ideally if ending on scene it will need some bushes or something to help brake up the joint between baseboard and backscene.   The next step will be printing off a full Templot plan to do some mock ups with buildings / rolling stock and get a better idea how its looking.   At this rate I am seriously thinking about getting the baseboard ordered and getting started (though I probably ought to get a bit more done on Brent first)...

Not sure about Luxulyan being a single bay platform. The earliest layout I have is 1908, in Cooke section 11, with conventional side platforms on either side of the loop. The island platform configuration with the station building isolated on the Up side came in in 1910, while the loop was removed in 1964 leaving a single line on the opposite side of the former island platform to the building.

 

You could have a look at Quintrel Downs Halt, which from 1910 had a single running line with a loop siding and a private siding leading off that. By 1965 it was just a plain single line.

[The Fatadder]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Not sure about Luxulyan being a single bay platform. The earliest layout I have is 1908, in Cooke section 11, with conventional side platforms on either side of the loop. The island platform configuration with the station building isolated on the Up side came in in 1910, while the loop was removed in 1964 leaving a single line on the opposite side of the former island platform to the building.

 

You could have a look at Quintrel Downs Halt, which from 1910 had a single running line with a loop siding and a private siding leading off that. By 1965 it was just a plain single line.

I did wonder what the reason for the bay platform was, makes sense that it originally had another platform that has been removed (though it was gone by 1930 when the below was taken)

https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW033139

 

my main reason for being drawn to this is simply down to it helping to justify the slightly odd curve of the branch which just didn’t look right when it was straight (given the similar curve on original board)

 

but if it had originally looked like this I don’t think it’s quite so implausible

 

[dj_crisp]

On 27/02/2024 at 03:46, The Fatadder said:

Next step on the 37 looks like a case of dismantle everything (for a third time) and try lubrication (worm bearing and drive draft ends being the key areas I think). For now I will live with it, probably until the run up to its next show.

 

this evening instead I’ve moved into my 158.  Which has sat awaiting wiring for far too long.  This unit was previously rebuilt with wipac clusters behind the window as per the prototype rather than Bachmanns twin led.  But they’ve never been wired up (not helped by a lack of fine wire.)

 

the plan is to use the Bachmann 2 pin connectors between the coaches  to give a wire for the headlight/marker (day), rail lights and cdl lights.
 I can’t recall if the cdl lights on both sides light up on a 158 on the prototype, but from a model perspective I think it’s useful to have both sides lit at once as the public will only see the live side and I can see the other side to show I’ve got them on!)

For the CDL lights I’ve used the Hurst lenses glued over a hole drilled in the side.  I have no idea as to the source of the small LED (they are from a 20 year old loco lighting kit I’ve never used), soldered to a resistor and wires.  now to repeat the process on the other coach before wiring it all up!

 

 

Initially it will get one of my old Lenz golds, although in time it needs something with 6 functions in order to give independent control of tail lights in the event that working couplings are fitted.   It won’t be a regular performer on the layout.  

 

given the success of this trial, I will now need to source more of the small LED and perform the same upgrade on my 150/153.  Annoyingly I don’t think Bachmann included a spare pin on the electric coupling so will need to find a way of getting power across to the second coach on the 150.

 

Nice work! I guess the Hurst CDL lenses are no longer available? They look great and I'm after quite a few for my second gen projects. I donr suppose anyone knows an alternative supply?

[The Fatadder]

3 minutes ago, dj_crisp said:

 

Nice work! I guess the Hurst CDL lenses are no longer available? They look great and I'm after quite a few for my second gen projects. I donr suppose anyone knows an alternative supply?

I have an alternative supply, I cant decide which I prefer.....

 

3d printed in translucent red resin, then painted with a Vallejo translucent orange paint.  I had lost my pack of Hurst parts so drew up and printed my own for my mk2s.    

[dj_crisp]

Excellent. Sounds like I need to get into this 3d printing malarkey 

[The Fatadder]

In preparation for the extension I am getting on with fitting working CDL lights to the passenger stock.  
 

I had a delivery today with 1.5mm orange LEDs, so a pair were soldered to some wire and glued inside the 153 body after carving off the moulded light and drilling the hole.

 

Of course Hornby wire everything the wrong way, so it took a bit of a look struggling to find the common positive before I remembered it’s the wrong way round.  

Testing the unit there are a couple of issues, it suffers from what is becoming a frequent issue on my old Lenz chips with F1 outputting voltage even when the function is off.  Eventually a replacement decoder is going to be needed (with this chip ending up in a steam loco where the lighting won’t be an issue.). In the mean time I will try a factory reset to check it’s not a cv issue.   I also want to reduce the brightness of the LEDs 

[The Fatadder]

With just over a week left until Ally Pally I will be on DEMU duties on the Saturday, along with bringing along a couple of my more recent projects (probably the latest couple of 37 resprays, the 56 and some wagons) I have been sorting out a few projects to work on.  As ever if there is anything people particularly want to see please let me know.

 

Orders have been placed for a class 56 crew, and transfers from Railtec for the MEA rake.  Lunch today was spent looking at photos trying to match up the Railtec transfers (pack A)  to specific wagons in order to verify the livery.   The EWS ones are pretty obvious which will cover two wagons (with 3 of the  other EWS wagons retaining their original identities).  391140 is included on the sheet as an MFA, this was a more interesting wagon with EWS red sides but Mainline blue ends so my plan is to chop up two sets of transfers to use the MFA number with the top half of an MEA. 003/004/033 were all confirmed to be in coal sector livery which are perfect for my needs, while 155 was confirmed in Mainline blue for which I havent got a model.   The rest I was unable to find photos (or only found in EWS livery).      While searching for photos I also found 391008 in Transrail branded coal sector which again is going to need a couple of sheets chopped up. 

 

The MEA rake is a little bit of a flight of fancy for Wheal Imogen, being more intended for a Plymouth or South Devon based layout.  It is based around the Eurobell/Telewest cable work in South Devon in the late 90s which saw deliveries of stone in MEA wagons from the Mendips (I think also from Meldon) delivered to locations between Exeter and Plymouth.   This included on one occasion a working by 59103 (in ARC livery) which I just happen to have found at a bargain price on ebay...   So that should be appearing on the workbench soon, after all the issues with my temporary chip trying to get a Dapol chip to work in other locos Ive pre ordered the sound kit for the Cavalex 56 and will put the Dapol chip in a Dapol loco where it in theory should actually work properly...   For exhibition use it just adds something a little different to run as a through service on the branch that is semi plausible (in the same sense as the engineering sets and the sea defence train) 

 

 

[The Fatadder]

59103 has arrived, there’s a little work to do (it was sold with a detail pack from a 59/2 so the fairing needs repainting and I need a new set of etched plates.)

 

If anyone has renumbered their 59103 and has a spare set of the Dapol plates they don’t need please let me know.

 

 

looks like the work will include:

-Rebuilding the 59/2 end to remove the linkages and repainting in ARC grey

-fill the gap between fairing and end / repaint in grey

-source / fit etched plates

-reduce silencer height 

-dinghams / decoder fitting 

-weather (particularly the bodyside grills, which vs the Hattons 66 are by far the biggest disappointment)

 

Also had a delivery from @railtec-models(amazingly fast as usual).  This has the numbers for the MEA rake (along with more ohle stripes for when I respray the roof on 50031). 

[The Fatadder]

I have had 59103 on the workbench today.

 

so far, I have modified the 59/2 lower fairing to 59/1 condition and fitted to the model.

 

 Relocated the radio roof pod, cutting and filing to the required size before adding the base plate and reusing the Dapol pod.  A pretty stupid error by Dapol there!

Once the filler is all dry the plan is to paint with NSE grey (which appears to be about the closest I have) so I can check for finish, before spraying with ARC grey sometime after Ally Pally once I’ve sourced a tin.

 

the final area of major work was the roof grill, I hate visible slots for the sound version so this had to go!  I’ve cut and fitted  lengths of 30 by 20 strip along with a backing piece to stop them falling through.  

this was then covered with filler and will be painted with a weathering mix before refitting the grill.

The exhaust silencer has been removed as i am going to order one of the correct sized replacement parts from eBay to finish off the roof.

 

while the filler was out the two extra air pipe holes were both filled.  

 

Finally I’ve taken the Dapol decoder out of 56078 and fitted it to the 59.  Just need to dig out the Sprog and reprogram the cvs to match Dapols list.

 

next on my list are the doors, the fit of the pointless opening mechanism is rubbish so my thinking is to remove it and glue them in position.

[The Fatadder]

As an initial check I have touched up the areas that have been worked on with a quick brushed coat of NSE grey which is remarkably similar to ARC grey (or at least Dapols version of it) to the point where I’m debating just blending in with a quick airbrush coat (with any slight difference more than obscured by the weathering.)

 

another coat of filler in the holes for the fictional second set of air pipes.  I should have just filled with plastic, but I am trying to avoid damaging the paint with solvents (whereas the water based filler won’t damage it).

 

 Some work on the lighting, the Dapol LEDs are all a bright blue white light, having seen mention in a few places of using transparent orange paint to rectify this I thought it worth a go.  I think it makes for a big improvement, so took the cabs apart for the same treatment.  (My Hornby 153 will be getting the same treatment sometime soon!)

While the cabs were out I’ve applied a couple of washes of AK streaking grime and fitted a driver.

 

I had leftover streaking grime on the pallet, which I’ve used on the bodyside grills to try and add a bit more depth to the missing mesh.  
 

Finally the doors were removed and glued solid, and the roof grill refitted.  God knows why they fitted opening doors to a model on which you can only open them by a mm or two without hitting the chassis block. 

[The Fatadder]

A little more work with the replacement Pensa Models silencer now painted and fitted to the model.  It still needs a lot more black adding to the paint.  

 

lashing eyes now added to the front

 

I have also made a start on weathering my seacow rake,

[The Fatadder]

Best way to finally relax after a very stressful day, sit down for an hour with a couple of packs of Railtec transfers and a set of Bachmann MEA to renumber.  
 

This focused on the wagons with duplicate numbers including  3 in EWS and 4 in Coal Sector, (with 2 more EWS and 1 Coal with unique numbers.). 
 

For the most part I’ve stuck with the numbers on the sheet, the exception being 608 and 140.  The latter is on the sheet as an MFA so needed the top splicing together with an MEA.   This wagon was photographed in period with EWS sides (with the red higher than normal) and Mainline blue ends.

 

608 still needs the 6 modifying into a 0 with a rust spot to get 391008 which is photographed on WotW with coloured Transrail branding 

 

Other small changes included some without the coal sector logos or Barry logos, and changes to OHLE flashes.

 

Im now thinking about a quick respray of the last coal sector wagon into the all over black (Loadhaul?) livery.  Eventually I could do with adding at least one in Mainline blue as well.  Eventually an MAA will also get added (once I’ve built it…)

  Half the rake so far was made up of old bodies fitted to the latest chassis from MFAs, while the rest followed the same approach with a batch of EWS bodies bought in a sorry state last year.

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, The Fatadder said:

Best way to finally relax after a very stressful day, sit down for an hour with a couple of packs of Railtec transfers and a set of Bachmann MEA to renumber.

 

Each to their own - but, personally, I don't find renumbering things relaxing at all!

[The Fatadder]

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Each to their own - but, personally, I don't find renumbering things relaxing at all!

I should caveat that statement by saying I am using Railtec's premade TOPS panels, so I have not had to make up individual number sets.  If I was having to make them up one number at a time like the old days, it would be a very different story!

[The Fatadder]

Yesterday evening saw the next step on the MEA rake is the weathering, starting off with the coal sector liveried wagons.  The first application was to add lots of rust spots and streaks to the sides of the wagon with a random vallejo mix.   The same mix was then used to do the same to the ends, before adding a little more dark brown/black and adding heavier build up of dirt along the top / bottom edge of the end.  

 

Once all of this was dry the next step was a wash of streaking grime for dark vehicles, before finishing off with powders.  For the most part the EWS wagons were left as is, although one factory weathered model required blending in where printed tops panels had been removed.   On one wagon I tried AK Dust & Dirt deposits, and was alarmed when it dried a lot lighter than I was expecting.  However further rework with thinners got the desired effect, it also gave a good colour match for weathering other wagons and looks like it will be great for polybulks!

 

The final wagon is in the process of a repaint into what I assume is unbranded Loadhaul black (although oddly on the MEA they didnt paint the ends orange, presumably they were painted right at the end of Loadhaul before EWS had decided on a livery.  This was sprayed with a quick coat of Halfords satin black, followed by EWS gold for the top edge of the wagon.  While the gold was drying the transfers were applied, Ive taken a bit of a shortcut here and just used one of the wagon numbers on the Railtec sheet that are in the appropriate style for this wagon but I couldnt find a photo online to confirm the livery.   Once dry it will need weathering (probably at Ally Pally tomorrow).

 

 

This was followed by a little more transfer work, adding CAIB logos along with a couple of more recent details to my Traffic Services Ltd polybulk.  Although it still needs Channel Tunnel logos adding before I can start weathering (with the grey one still needing number panels along with the tunnel logos and other details).  I also found a set of custom Railtec tops panels I had previously ordered for a Transrail Sea Urchin but never fitted, so this was also finished off. 

 

 

Finally, while working on the MEAs I had a bit of weathering mix left over, so I have had ago at the sides of a Bachmann Seacow.  I have yet to order the new tops panels for this one (and need to repaint the solbar black) but its coming together.  I do find weathering the ends of these a real pain with all the detail in the way!

 

At the moment my intention is to take the MEA box with me to Ally Pally tomorrow, with the intention of completing the chassis weathering and getting them fitted with couplings.  This will take the form of hook & bar in the bufferbeam for the intermediate wagons and dinghams on the ends (which also need fitting to the 59)

 

Edited March 15 by The Fatadder

[The Fatadder]

Last night was spent soldering up another batch of Dinghams, which have now been fitted to the Traffic Services Polybulk, 59003 and some private owner wagons for Brent.  For both the polybulk and the 59 the shaft for the coupling had to be filed down by just over 50% to get it to fit in the model's hole.

 

For the plain hook end on the 59 I have modified the Dapol screwlink, the pin was carefully chopped off the Dapol hook allowing the actual coupling to be removed.  After soldering a pin into the Dingham hook, the Dapol coupling was fitted before being secured in position with a couple of dots of solder.  This is the second loco on which I have fitted this hybrid screwlink / dingham, I think its a good improvement over the plain hook (and is something I will be looking at retrofitting to the existing fleet.)    (As mentioned previously my Dinghams dont work in the traditional way, so I havent used the latch on the non loop couplings.

Edited March 21 by The Fatadder

[The Fatadder]

I have been giving some thought to the signalling for the extension,

My thinking is that the point between the branchline and the yard (feeding into the double slip)  would have a shunt signal on the branch controlling the entrance and another for the exit of the yard.   I will probably regret it, but for the moment at least the intention is that they will be working (unlike the plastic ones on Brent).   With only two to build its not quite so daunting a task!

 

I am assuming there would also be a need for a signal to protect the yard entrance.  Now I am a little unsure as to how far back from the point this would need to be located (ideally I dont really want to be going back over the original board reworking it to include the signal).    My current assumption is that it would be on the yard side of the branch fairly close to it (hopefully giving enough of a sight line from the bridge. 

 

The baseboard is getting ordered today, looking forward to getting stuck into construction soon...

 

edit: I should have added, I am curious as how the point would be operated on the prototype, would a yard entrance point half way down the Newquay branch be operated by a hand leaver on site, a point motor or rodding from Par/St Blazey?   I think the latter is too far away for the max rodding lengths, and an electric point motor seems OTT for a rarely used yard entrance point.  So I am assuming it would just be a hand leaver alongside the point.  Thinking some more I assume this would actually be a small leaver frame with the leavers for the point and the double slip.

 

If this is the case with a hand operated point,  a further aside, how would the interlocking work between the signals and point?   Or am I over complicating things and the real thing wouldnt have any signals

Edited March 25 by The Fatadder

[The Fatadder]

Baseboard order has now been placed, its taken a little bit of thought as to the best way forward here.  Grange and Hodder dont offer a 1200 by 500 board (just a 900 by 500, or 1200 by 400/600).  With custom boards costing the price of the next size up.  This means an identical board to what I used for Wheal Imogen would be costing me an extra £25 over what I paid a year ago! 

 

This  got me thinking, the front 100mm or so of the layout is made up of the river along with other scenic parts, with all the track further back on the board.  Which naturally leads to the thought why pay for the extra 100mm when you are only going to be cutting holes in it.  Either way I still need to buy a 1200 by 600 sheet of ply to build the backscene (of which I only need about half of it), so could easily get some 3 inch deep strips cut from the rest and build an open frame section onto the front of the baseboard.  I think I still have a fair amount of foam board tucked away in the garage that could be used to shape the profile.....

 

So with that in mine an order has been placed for a 1200 by 400 board, soon to be followed by an order for a British Finescale RH B7 and double slip.  The rest of the track will have to wait until Bristol where I plan on picking up the required lengths of Peco bullhead.

 

 

I have also almost settled on a name, initial thoughts were focused around place names near to Luxulyan, with Rosevean, Penrose,  Trethevie  (the latter slightly tweaked).  The idea being with the clay works being named for my youngest daughter, the station should in someway incorporate my eldest's name.

 

I also seem to have bought yet another Bachmann 37 body, all be it one thats lacking its noses.  So an upgrade to 37057 is now on the cards.  I will be reusing the noses, roof pod and nameplates from my existing model.  I was never happy with the paint on this respray, it was completed prior to Railtec's release of the transfers for the reflective yellow stripe.  So I had masked / sprayed it, alas the masking was slightly too wide.  This was hidden with a little more weathering than was really needed for the period (working from a 2000s photo).    This will just leave 403 and 710 left with the old tooling, (along with the doner for the 902 conversion and a DRS loco still for the future).

Edited March 26 by The Fatadder

[The Fatadder]

More thoughts on signalling, my logic is that everything would be signalled from Goonbarrow box, so I have added the required point rodding and signals to the templot output below.  I am assuming that for the double slip you would have a hand leaver frame controlling both sides from one position, with rodding between it and the switches (but if that assumption is incorrect it will of course be easy to just have leavers directly aligned with each switch on the slip.   Thinking some more I will probably shift this to the other side of the track to keep it away from the running line.

 

The signal protecting the approach to the switch from the right would be just off scene, I guess a question would be whether the shunt signal would be mounted on the same post as the through signal pushing it off scene as well.  (A situation I wouldnt be completely adverse to seeing as it would be one less working shunt signal to build!)

 

All of which does involve shifting the layouts location slightly further up the line, I always had it located somewhere around Luxulyan (part because of it has provided a lot of the inspiration for the station, but also having Goonbarrow down line gives more interesting through traffic.)  This throws me a bit of a dilemma, in that ideally I do not want to be having to lay point rodding on the existing Wheal Imogen board.  Its been enough of a pain in the backside layout rodding on Brent post ballasting where I had at least laid the slabs for it in advance.  It will be much worse doing it  here!)     Which either means shifting the location past Goonbarrow, or flipping the orientation so that Newquay is on the right of the layout not the left.   I am less convinced by this given that looking at the prototype the point to enter the works at Goonbarrow was aligned to the direction of travel so that a train from Par would head straight into the works, not pass the point and propel in.    I will dig out the 2mm Assoc. book later and see if it confirms what the absolute maximum length of one rod (inc compensators etc) would be to double check there is no chance  this could have been controlled from Par (as the crow flies Luxulyan to Par is about 2 1/4 miles) 

 

Would welcome thoughts from those who understand the topic better than I.