Wright writes.....

[mullie]

Having only a limited space down one side of the garage I have  tried to make the operation of my layout interesting. Loaded wagons of sugar beet and coal can arrive on the mainline at the front and are then taken down the branch after a complicated shunt. The loads are then removed and the wagons return up the branch empty (loads removed) and taken back down the mainline. The fact that trains are moving to and from the same fiddle yard does not bother me, it is the operation I find interesting and am gradually improving my knowledge about how this would have been done in the late 40s early 50s. A long way to go yet. There is no goods yard as such only an exchange siding and a loop.. Trains are only 4-5 wagons plus brake but take a lot of sorting which keeps me amused. There are two short beet trains, a coal train and a GE and M&GN line stopping goods on the layout.

 

There are also four short passenger trains of various types, a mix of kits and modified rtr all weathered. Becuae this is a bitsa station, only two coaches of what could be a very long train on the GE line are ever visible. M&GN trains were apparently short out of summer time which has helped.

 

 

Wagons are a mixture of kits and mangled rtr and there is now a platform along the front of the layout ,this shot was taken when I was rebuilding the station.

 

The layout also features a stabling point where locos can take water, clear out ash and if necessary coal by hand from a wagon placed on the siding. Again, the wagon arrives loaded but the load is removed before it departs.

 

 

The trams on the back road are the mainstay of the branch. I'm now investigating the use of wagons to remove ash from the depot.

 

I try to run the layout both days of the weekend, but it rarely runs during the week due to work pressures but I do get the odd bit of time to work on aspects of the layout.

 

There is still much to do and my knowledge is developing but quite basic. I hope this is of interest

[Clive Mortimore]

All this talk about layouts, surely we all have our ideal type of layout. I like to see trains running, as Tony (t-b-g) says roundy-roundy type layouts are similar to a train set......yeah!!! What can be better than just watching trains? Well operation can be, I enjoy terminus type layouts, may be because I enjoyed train spotting at the big London stations. At the present moment we have our house up for sale, the plan is for us to move miles away where we can afford a piece of land for the horse to graze on and Mrs M to ride said horse, with a biggish barn so she can hide me away with my model railway and an house we can live in. Now the big barn idea will hopefully mean I can have a layout with trains running round and round, plus a terminus station I can bring them into and enjoy operating.

 

The plan above is only a rough idea of what I want to do. I want a largish terminus, and will need to get round both sides. The scenery will only include what is within the railway boundary, no townscape for me. Most of the mainline will not be scenic. I will have some sort of locomotive stabling yard, might even be two, one diesel and one steam. I like a little bit of shunting this will be either parcels stock or coal wagons and diesel tanks for the locos. There will be no freight yard. The two storage sidings will act as the destinations, once a train has departed the terminus it will do so many laps then enter a storage siding. Another one will depart and that will do x amount of circuits then be routed into the terminus. So a time table sequence can be devised. I do like seeing freight trains trundle around so both fiddle yards will contain some freight trains but they will stay out on the mainline. I think this is the best compromise I can come up with to satisfy my needs and to be able to operate it single handed. Two trains on the main line while I sort out the next departure from the terminus.

 

I am sticking with my fictitious L&YR and GNR station in Sheffield, pointing northwards, so no London bound trains. Services will be to places like Manchester, Leeds, Bradford, York, Grimsby, and Hull. Possibly some longer distant trains to Blackpool, Newcastle even Scotland. Loads of local suburban trains to Barnsley, Huddersfield, Doncaster, etc. Early to mid sixties, so a mix of steam and diesel locomotives plus loads of DMUs. No locomotives bigger than a Black Five or B1 or Class 40 hauling 8 coach trains. Ex LMS locos on the L&YR services which will include those stationed in ex LMS sheds on the North Eastern Region and ex LNER locos for the GNR trains. Diesel locos and units from the LMR, ER and NER.

[Andy R]

Hi Tony. Pleased to hear things are ok in the operating sphere. Buckingham needs several good operators to make it hum along.

I would love to see any wonderful layouts we can fit in tony . See how our itinerary unfolds.

Regards abdy happy operating

Andy R

 

Hello Andy,

 

You are most welcome any time you can get here.

 

Although the other Tony is moving away soon, I have a couple of other regulars on a Tuesday and a Friday, so our regular running sessions should be OK.

 

If we can make time, we should see if we can arrange for you to see the layout I mention above, with the 5 stations. It is like Buckingham with an extra through station after Grandborough and the fiddle yard modelled as another terminus.

 

Tony

[drmditch]

As regards the 'roundy roundy' debate, doesn't it rather depend on what one wants to achieve?

 

My railway is currently being re-built;-  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/105609-rebuilding-a-railway/page-1

 

There is no way the railway, or my modelling skills, will ever reach the standards of many of the layouts mentioned above. However, it is my private railway and meant for me, with occasional visitors who might be interested. 

It is inevitably compromised by tight curvature, steep gradients, un-prototypical track, and abbreviated track layouts (although with this re-build I am trying to do better.)

 

What it does permit is:-

 

- Running trains from 'the rest of the world' a.k.a Darlington, a.k.a the main storage sidings, via a (fictitious) junction station all the way to a (fictitious)Durham  terminus.

  (Yes, I know Durham had three railway stations - it's just that none of them quite fitted my requirements.)

- Running empty and loaded coal trains around the mid-level in opposite directions.

- Running (diverted) main-line trains around the lower level, with connections to the Durham branch.

- Providing a service of local passenger trains between three stations

- Providing freight services between goods yards

- Enjoying at least two (and possibly three) trains running continuously if all I want to do is 'watch the trains go by'.

 

It also allows me to make what I enjoy making - locomotives, rolling stock, buildings, and infrastructure. 

 

Some of these ideas came from articles written by David Jenkinson in the '70s and '80s, and of course further inspiration from Peter Denny.

 

So, although not prototypical, it allows me to model (and/or mimic) what the prototype was intended to do.

 

Lastly, and by no means least, it keeps me happy!

Edited November 12, 2016 by drmditch

[Mallard60022]

No, that's not it, Mark - but thank you, that's good too!

 

Given the lottery win - Newcastle Central and Gateshead, that'll do it!

That's a good roundy roundy, however the bridges (and possibly the Castle) will be a challenge. I think you will be able to build the north/east end crossing(s) one quiet weekend. 

Got some good pics of Gateshead depot that you can have and quite a lot of info on the Tyneside Electrics..

Phil

[Jol Wilkinson]

It also depends on what funds, space, skills, free time, etc. you have. Personal preferences also change over time. I've changed from modeling OO to P4, from  LMS, through late MR and LNWR to Edwardian LNWR. I get my greatest enjoyment from making models, rather than operating them.

 

So with the benefit of hindsight gained through advancing years my "present" ideal layout would be a continuous circuit and storage section with something like the four track LNWR mainline at Cow Roast between Tring and Hemel Hemstead. Slightly elevated embankment for better viewing of passing trains, canal bridge for a bit of architectural interest, etc. Then I could enjoy seeing my models simply running, as they did on the majority of the railway network. Sadly, lack of space and time will probably prevent it.

[Mallard60022]

And there you summarise my own dilemma ... 

 

On the one hand, I feel the deep 'call' to build something ... "not entirely unlike" ... the Great Central London Extension in the 1950s.  Nothing else will really do.  On the other hand, I only have 11 1/2 feet of length to play with (or actually about 14-15 feet as I intend eventually to breach the wall of my (nominal 12 foot) shed to complete the loop, a la Coachmann).

 

If I want anything even approaching 'realistic' train lengths as recommended by Tony clearly I ought to build a terminus-to-fiddle-yard,  But unless I model Marylebone itself (which even 'reduced' would hardly be practicable in the space), there is - quite literally - nothing I can use as "prototype inspiration" - even for a might-have been - because the GC simply didn't have any other termini.

 

So a 'roundy-roundy' with shorter trains (though still with some attempt at representing actual formations) it has to be.  But even then modelling a real location that had also enough on-site operation to be satisfying is quite impossible; reality was the smaller the station, the greater they were able to spread-out to fill the available space, as any photo will show you.

 

Historical realism versus realistic operation versus enjoyment versus non-negotiable space, time and financial constraints ... what to do?  Go completely fictional?  Chuck the whole dream, sell all the stuff and build a Great Western (or more likely Isle of Wight) branch line instead?  Blow the modelling budget on Lottery Tickets?  Decisions, decisions ...

 

Fortunately, George Dow's history has a wonderful throwaway line that the GC originally considered Mansfield as their starting point for the London Extension.  He doesn't amplify that, but still, on such authority it's good enough for me; and instead of (or perhaps as well as) a 'Chesterfield Loop' there'll therefore be a 'Mansfield Loop', allegedly with steep gradients requiring shorter trains, and on a constrained site - and so off we go!

 

As you say, 'each to his own' ...

Would Nott'm Vic fit your space? Probably not unless you breached both ends of the Shed for your return loops. 

Could you tolerate something just for watching loads of trains? If so then just north of Nott' Vic were two possibilities with two tunnels (very short viewing space.... Carrington was it?) or tunnel and road bridge (much more space with the carriage depot/sidings..... Basford was it?). Can't think of anywhere else except Charwelton..... wait for that to be retired and buy it and a new and longer shed?

Trouble is, now that I've suggested this to you my brain is now going into oh, wouldn't it be good to have a 'local' GC layout, maybe in the garage....?

Got to take more medication.

Phil

Edited November 12, 2016 by Mallard60022

[Willie Whizz]

Would Nott'm Vic fit your space? Probably not unless you breached both ends of the Shed for your return loops. 

Could you tolerate something just for watching loads of trains? If so then just north of Nott' Vic were two possibilities with two tunnels (very short viewing space.... Carrington was it?) or tunnel and road bridge (much more space with the carriage depot/sidings..... Basford was it?). Can't think of anywhere else except Charwelton..... wait for that to be retired and buy it and a new and longer shed?

Trouble is, now that I've suggested this to you my brain is now going into oh, wouldn't it be good to have a 'local' GC layout, maybe in the garage....?

Got to take more medication.

Phil

 

The trouble with almost anything "GC" is that because of the island platform station style, all pointwork has to lie beyond the platform ends.  By the time you've worked-in crossovers at the ends (probably with a single or double slip) and then an exit to the goods yard, in any scenario that would allow (say) maximum 6-coach express trains (i.e.pretty compromised by Tony's yardstick, but still better than toy-like), you can only fit it in with quite tight curvature at the ends, It has taken me years to come up with something I'm comfortable to begin building!  Even in a standard garage - which is as many as most of us can hope for in terms of space I suspect - it isn't easy to come up with a realistic-looking GC-style track plan that includes a station and goods yard, let alone adding anything much else to boost operational interest.    There was an article some years back in one of the mags by Peter Kasmierczak that had a suggested plan for New Basford and its carriage sheds, but even with a very much-shortened (3 coaches only, 4 at best I think) platform it still needed 20 feet of length IIRC.

 

Of course, there are always compromises that can be made (Half a station, or even no station come to mind, or use N-Gauge) ... but at some point it stops being either tolerably realistic and/or satisfying one's desire/need to model that particular type of subject.  Railway modelling - "The Art of Compromise" as someone once called it!

Edited November 12, 2016 by Willie Whizz

[asmay2002]

And there you summarise my own dilemma ... 

 

On the one hand, I feel the deep 'call' to build something ... "not entirely unlike" ... the Great Central London Extension in the 1950s.  Nothing else will really do.  On the other hand, I only have 11 1/2 feet of length to play with (or actually about 14-15 feet as I intend eventually to breach the wall of my (nominal 12 foot) shed to complete the loop, a la Coachmann).

 

If I want anything even approaching 'realistic' train lengths as recommended by Tony clearly I ought to build a terminus-to-fiddle-yard, 

 

Is your other unstated assumption that it must be OO rather than say N where 10 coach passenger trains would be possible in about 5 feet?

Edited November 12, 2016 by asmay2002

[Chimer]

As others have said, it's all down to what you want, your priorities, and the space you've got to achieve it.  My following take is theoretical as my layout currently exists only in my head - but it's easier to write as if it's actually there.  Home layout, OO, 15' x 6', no thoughts of exhibiting, normally one operator in steam.  Roundy-roundy featuring a junction station on one side, with one double-ended fiddle yard accessed via improbable junctions off the main in the country on the other side, which acts as both ends of the rest of the world and the branch line.  Can only fit 6 roads in the FY, with the longest around 8 feet.  Running a hopefully realistic sequence of movements to a clock-less "timetable", but a high proportion require quite a bit of fiddling with cassettes to set up.  So once I've set up, say, a 10 coach up express and a 25 wagon down coal train, they run several laps each while I just watch them passing one another at different places, in the station, on the viaduct, at tunnel entrances, or get on with setting up the next movement.  The one comes in to the FY off the up, and the replacement goes out.  Similarly, trains circulate on the main while the junction goods yard get shunted.  If trains just ran FY-station-FY I would be working like the proverbial one-armed paper-hanger and getting no enjoyable trainspotting experience, and any spectators would be bored rigid during the set-ups.

 

Changing tack, and looking at Clive's plan a few posts back, if I had that space I think I would put a single ended FY where he's got his terminus on that peninsula, and have 3 sides scenic with a sizeable junction station - which just underlines how different priorities produce different approaches.

 

Just my thoughts

 

Chris

Edited November 12, 2016 by Chimer

[New Haven Neil]

That's a good roundy roundy, however the bridges (and possibly the Castle) will be a challenge. I think you will be able to build the north/east end crossing(s) one quiet weekend. 

Got some good pics of Gateshead depot that you can have and quite a lot of info on the Tyneside Electrics..

Phil

 

You 'somewhat' over estimate my capabilities, Phil!  I've never seen a model of 'the' crossing yet.  It's a sad shadow of that now of course.  If I ever win the big one then I wonder if Norman Solomon would attempt it?

 

I have a lot of books ect on the subject, as it was 'home' for over 40 years. Would you PM me to see if you have anything I don't to save clogging up Tony's thread?  I think my current (bleagh) interest in 3rd rail of course comes from the South Tyneside bit that I just can't quite remember, I was starting to pull together a 'might have been' if the 3rd rail had been kept and extended, say to Darlo or Middlesboghorror.  4-CEP's instead of 4 car Met-cam's? The 5 car York Belle stopping only at Sunderland and Darlington? Hornby's on freight and 71's on parcels to the catalogue warehouses in Sunderland.  Oh no, I'm off an a flight of fantasy again....

[pom-pom]

Would Nott'm Vic fit your space? Probably not unless you breached both ends of the Shed for your return loops. 

Could you tolerate something just for watching loads of trains? If so then just north of Nott' Vic were two possibilities with two tunnels (very short viewing space.... Carrington was it?) or tunnel and road bridge (much more space with the carriage depot/sidings..... Basford was it?). Can't think of anywhere else except Charwelton..... wait for that to be retired and buy it and a new and longer shed?

Trouble is, now that I've suggested this to you my brain is now going into oh, wouldn't it be good to have a 'local' GC layout, maybe in the garage....?

Got to take more medication.

Phil

 

These are good ideas for a realistic GC layout incorporated within a 'round-roundy' layout but I think the best, shortest one which also incorporates a complex turnout layout is that modelled on the gap between tunnels, also in Nottingham, bordered by Clinton Street West and Clinton Street East. See the attached map image.

 

 

In fact, one of the Clinton Streets could be dispensed with to form a track-level view of the trains.

 

Nick

[pom-pom]

These are good ideas for a realistic GC layout incorporated within a 'round-roundy' layout but I think the best, shortest one which also incorporates a complex turnout layout is that modelled on the gap between tunnels, also in Nottingham, bordered by Clinton Street West and Clinton Street East. See the attached map image.

 

nott_vic_sth.jpg

 

In fact, one of the Clinton Streets could be dispensed with to form a track-level view of the trains.

 

Nick

 

 

By the way, by my rough calculations that gap between tunnels south of Nottingham Victoria is approximately 215ft x 80ft so that would be 860mm x 320mm in 4mm/ft scale. Easy to fit in a relatively small room!

[t-b-g]

The trouble with almost anything "GC" is that because of the island platform station style, all pointwork has to lie beyond the platform ends.  By the time you've worked-in crossovers at the ends (probably with a single or double slip) and then an exit to the goods yard, in any scenario that would allow (say) maximum 6-coach express trains (i.e.pretty compromised by Tony's yardstick, but still better than toy-like), you can only fit it in with quite tight curvature at the ends, It has taken me years to come up with something I'm comfortable to begin building!  Even in a standard garage - which is as many as most of us can hope for in terms of space I suspect - it isn't easy to come up with a realistic-looking GC-style track plan that includes a station and goods yard, let alone adding anything much else to boost operational interest.    There was an article some years back in one of the mags by Peter Kasmierczak that had a suggested plan for New Basford and its carriage sheds, but even with a very much-shortened (3 coaches only, 4 at best I think) platform it still needed 20 feet of length IIRC.

 

Of course, there are always compromises that can be made (Half a station, or even no station come to mind, or use N-Gauge) ... but at some point it stops being either tolerably realistic and/or satisfying one's desire/need to model that particular type of subject.  Railway modelling - "The Art of Compromise" as someone once called it!

 

The island platform style that people often quote as a GCR standard only applies to that little branch that they built down to London. There are many, many stations along the original Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire line that are more conventional. Or there is the LD&ECR route, or the Cheshire Lines system, both of which had superb possible prototypes for modelling. These northern lines were full of interest and scenic possibilities yet many enthusiasts concentrate on the line to London.

 

On some of the routes, a 6 coach train was much nearer what ran on the real thing than a 14  coach set.

[t-b-g]

By the way, by my rough calculations that gap between tunnels south of Nottingham Victoria is approximately 215ft x 80ft so that would be 860mm x 320mm in 4mm/ft scale. Easy to fit in a relatively small room!

 

You might get closer if you replace mm with cm but I know what you mean! It really isn't that long.

 

I measured it once myself and it was the width that was the killer. No matter how long your arms are, reaching the middle of 3.2metres is pretty impossible. The other problem is that you either change the scenic aspect to give a good view or you have to look down on everything.

 

Leicester Central is around the same length but only around 1m wide, perhaps widening a bit more for the turntable. It is also built high up on arches and has trams running along the front of the rather nice building (as built, it got butchered later) at ground level, nicely framing the scene. All those trains terminating or changing loco would make for a superb operational layout.

Edited November 12, 2016 by t-b-g

[pom-pom]

You might get closer if you replace mm with cm but I know what you mean! It really isn't that long.

 

I measured it once myself and it was the width that was the killer. No matter how long your arms are, reaching the middle of 3.2metres is pretty impossible. The other problem is that you either change the scenic aspect to give a good view or you have to look down on everything.

 

Leicester Central is around the same length but only around 1m wide, perhaps widening a bit more for the turntable. It is also built high up on arches and has trams running along the front of the rather nice building (as built, it got butchered later) at ground level, nicely framing the scene. All those trains terminating or changing loco would make for a superb operational layout.

 

The south end of the brick-built cutting on the map above where it enters Thurland Street tunnel is almost exactly 80ft wide so in 4mm scale that's 320mm or just over a foot in old money. As you can see the cutting has parallel sides so is this width all along its length. I think the big problem with my idea is that the northern end of the cutting was actually a girder bridge and therefore if a layout allowed a view under this then some of the southern end of the platforms would potentially have to be modelled...

 

Leicester Central would be magnificent but being on a viaduct offers no potential for hiding the northern/southern approaches as they curved non-prototypically to join round the back in a fiddle yard on a 'roundy-roundy' layout which I believe was an initial idea, above.

[pom-pom]

You might get closer if you replace mm with cm but I know what you mean! It really isn't that long.

 

I measured it once myself and it was the width that was the killer. No matter how long your arms are, reaching the middle of 3.2metres is pretty impossible. The other problem is that you either change the scenic aspect to give a good view or you have to look down on everything.

 

Leicester Central is around the same length but only around 1m wide, perhaps widening a bit more for the turntable. It is also built high up on arches and has trams running along the front of the rather nice building (as built, it got butchered later) at ground level, nicely framing the scene. All those trains terminating or changing loco would make for a superb operational layout.

 

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

[Clive Mortimore]

These are good ideas for a realistic GC layout incorporated within a 'round-roundy' layout but I think the best, shortest one which also incorporates a complex turnout layout is that modelled on the gap between tunnels, also in Nottingham, bordered by Clinton Street West and Clinton Street East. See the attached map image.

 

nott_vic_sth.jpg

 

In fact, one of the Clinton Streets could be dispensed with to form a track-level view of the trains.

 

Nick

Hi Nick

 

Nottingham is not the only place where one could make a nice little roundy-roundy. Liverpool Street Metropolitan Railway is quite interesting. Met Rly freights to Whitechapple, district trains on the inner circle, electric hauled GWR trains terminating.........and so on.

 

Note the 1916 plan with the junction to Liverpool Street GER.

 

Yes I know this was the inspiration for Cyril Freezer's Minories

[APOLLO]

Carrington station, just north of Nottingham Vic on the GC line mentioned - here is a plan

 

 

Photos here courtesy of dave F

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/69274-dave-f-more-photos-added-21-june-from-1947-to-1955ish/page-13&do=findComment&comment=1019491

 

Brit15

Edited November 12, 2016 by APOLLO

[pom-pom]

Hi Nick

 

Nottingham is not the only place where one could make a nice little roundy-roundy. Liverpool Street Metropolitan Railway is quite interesting. Met Rly freights to Whitechapple, district trains on the inner circle, electric hauled GWR trains terminating.........and so on.

Liverpool street.png

 

Note the 1916 plan with the junction to Liverpool Street GER.

 

Yes I know this was the inspiration for Cyril Freezer's Minories

 

Hello Clive,

 

fascinating - I had no idea there was a junction and a line from here to Liverpool St. Station. Coincidentally, I was poking about Liverpool St. Station earlier this week on my lunch break, admiring the architecture particularly down Sun Street Passage. I'm too young to know (50 next week) but it looks as though the northern approaches to the station would have been spectacular before they were all covered over and built over. Same goes for next-door Broad Street Station of which nothing remains. A veritable railway metropolis in this part of town.

 

Nick

[t-b-g]

The south end of the brick-built cutting on the map above where it enters Thurland Street tunnel is almost exactly 80ft wide so in 4mm scale that's 320mm or just over a foot in old money. As you can see the cutting has parallel sides so is this width all along its length. I think the big problem with my idea is that the northern end of the cutting was actually a girder bridge and therefore if a layout allowed a view under this then some of the southern end of the platforms would potentially have to be modelled...

 

Leicester Central would be magnificent but being on a viaduct offers no potential for hiding the northern/southern approaches as they curved non-prototypically to join round the back in a fiddle yard on a 'roundy-roundy' layout which I believe was an initial idea, above.

 

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. 

[pom-pom]

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. 

 

No problem, that's what I had thought you may have been referring to dimension wise.

 

The fantastic Leicester South Junction layout uses a similar technique for the scenic break at it's northern end where the first half of Braunstone Gate girder bridge (the famous 'bowstring' bridge demolished in 2009) is modelled. I saw it at Alexander Palace a couple of years ago and naively asked when the Leicester Central section would be added which was met with a somewhat deserved scowl!

[richard i]

Not a real location but I will have a GCR station with all parts in 18feet once finished. This includes the curves at the ends. We need to remember platforms could be short for the locals to stop at, but longer expresses would breeze through.

[peach james]

You 'somewhat' over estimate my capabilities, Phil!  I've never seen a model of 'the' crossing yet.  It's a sad shadow of that now of course.  If I ever win the big one then I wonder if Norman Solomon would attempt it?

 

I have a lot of books ect on the subject, as it was 'home' for over 40 years. Would you PM me to see if you have anything I don't to save clogging up Tony's thread?  I think my current (bleagh) interest in 3rd rail of course comes from the South Tyneside bit that I just can't quite remember, I was starting to pull together a 'might have been' if the 3rd rail had been kept and extended, say to Darlo or Middlesboghorror.  4-CEP's instead of 4 car Met-cam's? The 5 car York Belle stopping only at Sunderland and Darlington? Hornby's on freight and 71's on parcels to the catalogue warehouses in Sunderland.  Oh no, I'm off an a flight of fantasy again....

Tim Warrirs is the other name that comes to mind NHN- http://www.bronx-terminal.com/ , in particular, http://www.bronx-terminal.com/?cat=8 , but in any case, lots of P&C work in there !

[Mallard60022]

Carrington station, just north of Nottingham Vic on the GC line mentioned - here is a plan

 

 

Photos here courtesy of dave F

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/69274-dave-f-more-photos-added-21-june-from-1947-to-1955ish/page-13&do=findComment&comment=1019491

 

Brit15

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