Wright writes.....

[coachmann]

Just had a bit of a doodle with your picture.... 

 

Edited April 7, 2015 by coachmann

[stewartingram]

Apart from the lack of smoke, I almost think that the colour picture looks more realistic! The track on the b&w picture has something of a feel for Setrack points? Also, if anything the model creates feeling of more space than the real thing does, and I mean that in the best possible way. Strange that (to me at least), the model comes across as the more realistic one!

Still, great fun in trying to recreate the real thing in model form as well as is possible. Nothing to get all worked up over though if it can't be reproduced "just right"!. Once again, lovely piece of modelling, and publicly presented in a warm and friendly way. Thanks Tony for the enjoyment.

 

Stewart

Edited April 8, 2015 by stewartingram

[Tony Wright]

Just had a bit of a doodle with your picture.... 

 

post-18225-0-05001900-1428434039_thumb.jpgWEB Wright shot.jpg

Thanks Larry,

 

The one you've done looks better, especially in the background. 

 

The reason for not being able to place the loco in exactly the same relative spot is because the model is some 16" short at this point. South of the most northerly pointwork, everything is to scale length, and it's just the plain trackwork that's been shortened. It would have been to scale had I not insisted on having the MR/M&GNR as a circuit, but there you go. 

 

The viewpoint is also much higher up. Those with sharp eyes will note that the ballast bin is on the other side of the left-hand signal. Other (slightly later) pictures show it in the model's position. I suppose such things could be moved?  

[Clive Mortimore]

Thanks Larry,

 

The one you've done looks better, especially in the background. 

 

The reason for not being able to place the loco in exactly the same relative spot is because the model is some 16" short at this point. South of the most northerly pointwork, everything is to scale length, and it's just the plain trackwork that's been shortened. It would have been to scale had I not insisted on having the MR/M&GNR as a circuit, but there you go. 

 

The viewpoint is also much higher up. Those with sharp eyes will note that the ballast bin is on the other side of the left-hand signal. Other (slightly later) pictures show it in the model's position. I suppose such things could be moved?  

If only the shed had been built another 2 foot longer :resent:

[CUTLER2579]

If only the shed had been built another 2 foot longer :resent:

 

If only the garden was 2 feet wider.       

[Dominion]

Or a Tardis

[Andy Reichert]

If only the shed had been built another 2 foot longer :resent:

 

Or Tony had chosen HO 

 

Andy

[Dominion]

My plan to needing 2 extra feet, 2.5 actually. A land grab into the basement corridor.

Under test to see if it stays flat.

 

Other benefit is it makes the duck under very easy as the floor there is 17 inches lower than in my train room.

Edited April 8, 2015 by Dominion

[Dominion]

It is Mr Wright's influence actually. I believe Tony has said he thinks you need 32 feet to model the East Coast Main Line, and I was a few feet short.

Edited April 9, 2015 by Dominion

[manna]

G'day Gents

 

32', you could almost, have Kings Cross, although you'd probably need another 50' for the fiddle yard. LOL.

 

manna

[Judge Dread]

My plan to needing 2 extra feet, 2.5 actually. A land grab into the basement corridor.

Under test to see if it stays flat.

 

Other benefit is it makes the duck under very easy as the floor there is 17 inches lower than in my train room.

I understand from my friend at the Land Registry over here that if no one complains in 12 years (it used to be 7 years) of your use-age, you can claim the space/land as your own. Best of luck.

Edited April 9, 2015 by Judge Dread

[Dominion]

12 years ? I may have the track done by then.  My wife actually said she thought it looked "cool and kind of architectural !"  

That's before she realized the cupboard door on the right has a restricted opening now.  At least I think she realised that, as someone other than me tried to open it. Not planning on bringing it up to confirm though.

[Andy Reichert]

I understand from my friend at the Land Registry over here that if no one complains in 12 years (it used to be 7 years) of your use-age, you can claim the space/land as your own. Best of luck.

 

You also need to fence it to keep off other claimants from that time on and pay the annual "property taxes". All at your own risk of losing everything you invested if the original property owner claims it back within the statutory limit.

 

Andy

[Tony Wright]

It is Mr Wright's influence actually. I believe Tony has said he thinks you need 32 feet to model the East Coast Main Line, and I was a few feet short.

I think the reference to 30+ feet was with regard to the rule of thirds, whereby the longest train one runs is about a third the length of the layout. Thus, a typical ECML express in BR steam days might be ten cars long, plus a loco, so around 10' (possibly a twitch more). That's why Stoke was 30' long (though to dead scale it would have been 94'!). 

 

I've mentioned this before, but I think a factor of a prototype station scene appearing 'convincing' is how trains appear/disappear to/from the modelled section. I believe the perceived wisdom is to go on/off scene as near as possible as the prototype does, under bridges or tunnel mouths if possible. It's all well and good saying suitable overbridges are (say) 30' apart in scale, so I need 30'. You don't, you need more, at least 3' more at each end to go round the bend (in OO), especially for multi-tracks . That's why my LB is 16" short, to go on/off on the straight and then to get around the corners, out of sight. Main line layouts where the tracks start to go on/off scene at a right-angle never really 'work' in my view (the radius is always too tight); that's why I was never happy with Stoke's south end. 

 

The splendid Grantham, which I've visited quite often, achieves its trains' entrances/exits perfectly, even though it's substantially shortened overall. Either going under the Great North Road bridge, or passing through Gonerby or Peascliffe Tunnels, the trains are on the straight, as they should be. 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...32', you could almost, have Kings Cross, although you'd probably need another 50' for the fiddle yard...

 

Easy! The main station throat is only a furlong from overall roof to tunnel mouth, 2.6m / 8.5' in 4mm. Take a little more for the tracks to go out of sight in the gloom either end, still well short of needing 32 feet. The colossal fiddle yard to accomodate the necessary stock for anything like realistic operation: I have a cunning plan...

[Focalplane]

Space, the final frontier!  I well remember growing up with C J Freezer's track plan booklets which seemed to focus on 8' x 10' garden sheds and the like.  He had one design based on a real location which started out large and then shrank into successively smaller layouts.  I seem to remember the phrase "the urge to compress was on. . . ."

 

Friends in Calgary have their basements, friends in West Texas have their outdoor "gardens" where it never seems to rain, but back in the UK it seems the garden shed still reigns supreme, even if it is 30ft long!  I love those North American layouts that have as much altitude as width with tracks snaking around bluffs and lines appearing out of tunnels straight onto trestle bridges over deep ravines and back underground again.  But so often, the space problem rears an ugly head and I think back to Mr. Freezer's "urge to compress".

 

The strange thing is, though, that when there is limited space available, the best plan may be to have very little railway, just enough to keep one's interest, and focus on the details.  Too much railway packed into a small space is not at all life like.  Little Bytham may be large but I think it embraces the "simplicity is good" concept rather well.

[96701]

I'm trying to dispose of a friend's model railway stuff. I have one loco that I think was special to him, but he don't care anymore. Maybe it's the emotional value that I feel that nobody else probably feels only because he and I had discussions about it and I know how much it meant to him. If nobody else gives a toss, then the loco is worth nothing. If two people are interested, then it is worth a bit more. If tens of people are interested and I can get them involved in a bidding war, it could be worth a hell of a lot. There are too many coincidences involved in maximizing money.

[Dominion]

I think the reference to 30+ feet was with regard to the rule of thirds, whereby the longest train one runs is about a third the length of the layout. Thus, a typical ECML express in BR steam days might be ten cars long, plus a loco, so around 10' (possibly a twitch more). That's why Stoke was 30' long (though to dead scale it would have been 94'!). 

 

I've mentioned this before, but I think a factor of a prototype station scene appearing 'convincing' is how trains appear/disappear to/from the modelled section. I believe the perceived wisdom is to go on/off scene as near as possible as the prototype does, under bridges or tunnel mouths if possible. It's all well and good saying suitable overbridges are (say) 30' apart in scale, so I need 30'. You don't, you need more, at least 3' more at each end to go round the bend (in OO), especially for multi-tracks . That's why my LB is 16" short, to go on/off on the straight and then to get around the corners, out of sight. Main line layouts where the tracks start to go on/off scene at a right-angle never really 'work' in my view (the radius is always too tight); that's why I was never happy with Stoke's south end. 

 

The splendid Grantham, which I've visited quite often, achieves its trains' entrances/exits perfectly, even though it's substantially shortened overall. Either going under the Great North Road bridge, or passing through Gonerby or Peascliffe Tunnels, the trains are on the straight, as they should be. 

 

Thanks Tony. It was exactly that discussion on Wright writes that led me to this adaptation to the plan. It gets me straight entry to the tunnels with a coach length in the gloom, so it should look straight from the scenic side.  I am not sure I can fix the other end yet, but this end will be better because of the dialogue on here.  

 

The structure has been suspended now for a couple of weeks and is staying flat so far, so fingers crossed.

What may look like a safety lip to prevent falls is actually aluminium extrusion and provides most of the structure's strength. It curves to the wood road bed in one direction but definitely wants to stay straight on the other dimension. I was able to use thicker aluminium bar on the outside of the curve than on the inside as the radius I needed it to conform to is bigger. 

 

When I have been brave enough to slacken off the suspension wire turn buckles the roadbed stays flat and does not deflect very much at all, at least for as long as I have tried it so far.  So I am hopeful the combination will keep it stable.

 

Tom

[Mallard60022]

Tony is a good influence (well regarding some matters anyway ). 

I got fed up with not finding a complete BR1G tended (4mm) to go behind a recently purchased and nicely built DJH 4mm loco (can't say what at the moment) and so I almost built one!

Actually I sourced a body through a 'horse trade' on RMWeb (thanks Redgate) and used the admirable Comet chassis and frame kits to sort it out (thanks Andrew).

Horrible pics I'm afraid but it does prove that I occasionally get off my ar*e and do something!

Most satisfying bit was taking the whizzy saw to the nasty plastic coal 'pile'!

Not finished as it needs tidying up quite a bit, however it will do for my requirments, especially when covered in filth.

Quackers.

 

 

Edited April 13, 2015 by Mallard60022

[Tony Wright]

I've just returned from a splendid weekend passing comment on Grantham. 

 

Progress is certainly taking place, and everyone is contributing in the most entirely practical way.

 

 

 

 

Though much remains to be done, the trackwork is really coming along. 

 

 

 

I took along, amongst other things, the scratch-built Stirling Single I've mentioned earlier. This is now on loan to LOCOMOTION for examination. It's tender drive and is just about rigid as a sort of 0-8-0, but it will negotiate tight radii. I'm sure Rapido's designers will come up with something really stunning, probably loco-drive as well. 

 

 

I like this picture, showing, as I hope it does, how to have a realistic exit/entrance from/to the fiddle yard. Granted, I've 'blacked-out' the tunnel interior, but there isn't a wholly unrealistic right-angle bend in view. 

 

More on the Grantham Streamliner Years thread. 

 

 

 

 

[polybear]

I'm trying to dispose of a friend's model railway stuff. I have one loco that I think was special to him, but he don't care anymore. Maybe it's the emotional value that I feel that nobody else probably feels only because he and I had discussions about it and I know how much it meant to him. If nobody else gives a toss, then the loco is worth nothing. If two people are interested, then it is worth a bit more. If tens of people are interested and I can get them involved in a bidding war, it could be worth a hell of a lot. There are too many coincidences involved in maximizing money.

It's always worth remembering the endless pleasure it obviously gave him - that's surely priceless.....

[Mallard60022]

Wow! That first pic demonstrates the wonder of this layout. I have a real soft spot for Grantham, however it would be for 1962! I was on a Newcastle bound train with engine change of two A3s....great.

Phil

[Nelson Jackson]

I love that Stirling Single, a really beautiful model, great pics Tony, thanks.

[Market65]

Hi. Grantham is really coming along now, and it really looks so stunning in all ways. All the different elements are coming together in such harmony, and producing a most astonishing end result. This is the kind of layout which I have always dreamt about, but somehow never have had the room to fit it all in. The trackwork, just shows what can be done with Peco RTL track. If the layout were mine I would run to the '30's era, and the late '50's, for this would give even more choice with the trains that could be run. Well done to everyone for getting this far with a most lovely and remarkable layout of a major ECML station.

 

All the best,

 

Market65.

[Andy Reichert]

Hi. Grantham is really coming along now, and it really looks so stunning in all ways. All the different elements are coming together in such harmony, and producing a most astonishing end result. This is the kind of layout which I have always dreamt about, but somehow never have had the room to fit it all in. The trackwork, just shows what can be done with Peco RTL track. If the layout were mine I would run to the '30's era, and the late '50's, for this would give even more choice with the trains that could be run. Well done to everyone for getting this far with a most lovely and remarkable layout of a major ECML station.

 

All the best,

 

Market65.

 

Is there a similar positioned photo of the real Grantham track work on line somewhere for comparison?

 

It seems to me that all the turnouts on the model shots, whether on the mains or the sidings,  appear to have the same crossing angle.

 

Andy