4firstimes

On the subject of platform lengths , being an acceptable length of a model platform compared with a prototype. Whilst being faced with the situation, with a potential house move, and the realisation that the present layouts in N gauge will not fit without considerable modification, the option is to rebuild and consider one of my favourite locations. Looking at several options, and with an understanding of how railways developed, certainly platform lengths changed over the years mostly increasing as traffic developed or coach lengths grew. Certainly there as was a lot of commonality in lengths, shorter that 300 feet , under 350 feet , 400 feet and the longer lengths at mainline and terminal stations. Electrification on the Southern saw platforms grow to accommodate at least 12 coaches 500/600ft . Modellers can work out what the scale length equates to in their model choices. The point is around selective compression in both the length and width to be representative, and also to present a balanced perspective. Interesting whilst looking at prospective locations to model a number of similarities in lengths quickly became apparent, which demonstrate how we modellers under estimate passenger train compositions. A fellow modeller kindly provided me with information on prototype platform lengths from the link below. https://www.railwaydata.co.uk Using this reference source and which contains details of all the remaining stations on the railway network the platform length can be estimated and resized to your chosen scale. Using this tool as a guide , one can quickly show how railway modellers underestimate platform lengths on their models. As a former commuter I know understand how platforms where lengthen as traffic patterns changed.

In response to a previous posting in the forum of running around trains at Mallaig with more than 6/7 coaches. With a bit of research I have found the extract , other pictures or webcast appear to have been removed. The date in question was 16 Jan 1983, A SLOA (Steam Locomotive Operators Association) No 14 Pullman Scenic Land Cruises Headboarded as ‘ The Winter West Highlander’. The train consisted of 11 coaches hauled by class 37s locomotives. One of the 37s Class 37/0 37027 ‘ Loch Eil’, the other 37 i haven’t identified. As the 11 coach consist was too long for run round facilities , the locomotives uncoupled with two coaches removed and shunted back to near the Former Signalbox at Mallaig to facilitate the reversal for the return working to Fort William. I understand the entire process took around 45 mins. I have located a link below to show how part of the process was completed. link. https://www.flickr.com/photos/lickeybanker/14666108896/in/photostream/ 16 jan 1983

Whilst looking for the web cast of shunting at Mallaig, I came across this Album set of over 72 pages of Photographs of the West Highland line Including The Mallaig Extension. Most of the images appear to be post 1980, there are several of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. This is the first time I have seen a vast collection grouped together. The is an interesting collection of Glenfinnan, whilst I can not work out how the collection is arranged, some are date stamped, most just have details of the location. I have a personal interest in both Arisaig and Lochailort, the angle and location of picture provides an atmospheric representation of how the West Highland line has changed over the years. The link is provided below, I am not sure if this source of information has been discussed in this forum previously. Link: https://www.flickr.com/groups/1667170@N22/pool/page1

The maximum number of coaches which Mallaig Platform could handle was six mark one coaches . On the internet there was a pod cast of showing how a train with nine coaches , was split ran around and re joined . I believe a ‘Pathfinder’ rail tour in 2016 the consist was 10 or 11 coaches , being top and tailed. The train was split and shunted in portions using the siding to facilitate the locomotive at the headshunt North End to run round.. An example is as follows , this is not the one I was referencing too; ‘Chasing the Royal Scotsman to Mallaig 20 April 2019’ If I can find the links again I edit this posting

Through this forum an observation has been made concerning how far forward a train has stopped in front of a home signal at Glenfinnan. The natural reason for this would be to clear the track circuiting and if another train was present on platform 2 this could depart following the exchange of token , either physically with the signaller prior to RETB or electronically via RETB . The infrastructure at Glenfinnan should be considered. The platform lengths at Glenfinnan is recorded as 75meters which up equates to approximately 250 feet. The actual loop is 139 meters or 455feet. When steam service operates on the Mallaig Extension the consist is made up of a locomotive plus tender and up to seven mark one coaches. The knowledgeable modellers can work out the total train length , hence the need to stand forward of the Home signal to accommodate the loop. When the West Highland Line was commissioned to accept RETB in March 1988. ScotRail issued a special notice for the Permanent Way and Signalling Arrangements for the Working of the West Highland Line including changes to sectional appendix alterations, Sectional Appendix section 1 table A pages 100 provides interesting information on loop clearance lengths (CL) and additional information on the south section of the West Highland Line on how the route was operated. A copy to the link is provided below. https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/pullfree.asp?FilePath=ArchiveSignals\Downloads\brscot&FileName=1988-westhighland.pdf it must be remembered in the days of steam the West Highland perpetuated the North British Railway practice of coupling the pilot locomotive inside the lead locomotive which opens up an interesting operational aspect when the pilot locomotive was removed from the train at Glenfinnan

The question of Headboad colours and coaches used on the Mallaig Extension when steam was re-introduced has been covered previously within this forum. With researching the Mallaig Extension since 1990 approximately I can provide the following information. The first public steam excursion on the Mallaig Extension was 28 May 1984 with Black Five locomotive 5407 , blue grey coaches and fleet of five coaches TSO and BSO where assigned to this roster. However 5407 who had the honour of inaugurating the steam service powered a press preview on 24 May 1984 . The headboard if carried was blue with white lettering “West Highlander”. Black Five 44767 George Stephenson was also assigned to this service together with Maude 683 as the steam service ran Weds, Thurs, and Sundays. Maude’s exploits have been recoded which resulted in the in the Friday service “Glenfinnan Flyer” between 13 July to 3 August. This has been recorded with the headboard of blue background and white lettering “West Highlander”. The next season 1985 saw a dedicated set of mark one coaches in white/cream and LNER green coaches . The colour being reminiscent of the ex LNER tourist Stock. These mark one coaches introduced in 1985 BSO: 9312, TSO:4050,4243,4494,4610,4623,4643 “ West Highland” legend with Scottie Dogs and ScotRail. Black Fives numbers 44767,5407 rostered for the season. The season 1987 saw a second set of dedicated Mark one coaches introduced BCK:IC21241C TSO: IC3766C,IC44135c,IC4900C, IC4911c, IC4912C “West Highland Line” at the end of the 1987 season the original Mk One set was withdrawn . In 1987 LNER K1 was assigned to the seasons trips 2005 and with a blue background and white Lettered headboard “The Flying Kipper”. Interested modellers will need to consult British Railways Mark one Coaches , by Keith Parkin to indentify the Diagram numbers of the coach builds and also the livery variations of the the dedicated sets. The original set had dark grey rooks including the gutters , reading down the coach sides green, black lining, cream, black lining, LNER green with solebar black The set was lettered “West Highland ‘and ‘ScotRail’ . Scottie on centre doors all lettering in white. Ends LNER Green. The later set , reading down the coach sides- Grey roof , Green including Gutters , Black lining , Cream, Black , Red lining ,LNER Green , solebar black Lettered ‘West Highland Line in white , coach number using prefix IC , Ends Black .

The corporate colour scheme of the Buildings on the West Highland Line Or West Highland Railway , modellers might be interested in this information provide below, the link is included https://www.stationcolours.info/18-2/ As the North British infrastructure was found on the West Highland Line. I understand even through the LNER period the former identities were retained unless replaced. NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY The NBR had two color schemes for buildings; they could be painted in two shades of green, the lighter for planking, valencing, etc, and a darker shade for metalwork, doors, etc. As an alternative cream and brown were used together; in both cases, window frames were white. Ironwork is recorded as being black, but I am nor sure to which Ironwork this refers. I have a feeling that the two-tone green was the later livery used for instance on the West Highland line, but I have no written evidence for this. Station seats were black, grey or white with gold or yellow lettering identifying the station. Platform barrows were vermillion with black ironwork. Presumably, poster boards were painted either brown or in the darker green shade. PAINTS FOR MODELLERS Cream – Precision SR buildings cream. Brown – Precision LMS buildings brown. Light green – Tamiya Yellow Green Dark green – Tamiya Park Green. Many thanks to Archie Noble for much of this information.

The interest in this model of Glenfinnan station I have been following closely, as I have over a number of years researching the Mallaig Extension, having an active interest in Glenfinnan . Earlier in this forum article a discussion has appeared of the signal levers in the Box at Glenfinnan. I was lucky to receive some information of the layout when the box closed 15th April 1986. With the express wishes of the originator not to publish or share therefore I am unwilling to make public the information, however I will attempt to describe . Glenfinnan had 15 levers , lever 6 and 7 listed as spare. Tylers tablet section was from Glenfinnan to Lochailort, and Lochailort to Annat , the mid section being Glenfinnan Signal box . Lever 1 yellow Distant signal From Lochailort, distance in yards unknown Pulls lever 2 lever 3. Lever 2 Red home pulls lever 4 point lock Lever 3 Red Home up platform starter pulls 5 Lever 4 Blue point lock loop Lever 5 Black loop points lever 6 spare Lever 7 spare Lever 8 Black points to loading dock Lever 9 Red pulls 10 Shunt signal Lever 10 Black points to Goods Yard Lever 11 Black points to loop from Lochailort Lever 12 Blue point lock on loop from Annat Lever 13 Red Home Down Platform starter also pulls 11 Lever 14 Red Home 293 yards from signal box also pulls 12 Lever 15 Yellow Distant signal 850 yards from Signal box pulls 14 and 13. The Levers pulling signals 1 Distant (Up Distance) Signal 2 Home (Up home) and signal 3 Home starter, signal 13 Down home starter I have no information on the distances from the box . The article in the forum identifies some of the plates which appeared on the signal levers.

Interesting following this article of the frustrations of wiring points for solenoid operation and electro-frog r uni-frog. Switching to DCC several years ago I have looked looked back and always fail to understand other modellers fustrations. Having several layouts Arisaig and Cromer Road, both use DCc to control the points signals and Block dectection. Carefully planing minimises inter baseboard joint connections, and with two DCC power buses one for the track and one for the accessories , why bother building a layout with DCc to power the trains and DC points and signals. This forum has mentioned several systems for operating points , and I would recommend the advice, for solenoids I prefer NCE snap it to operate peco or seep point motors. With Two wires from the DCC accessory bus and three wires from the point motor to the snap it, simple self contained units. Although I prefer to use something called a frog juicer to switch the power on electro frog or unifrog points, again two wires from the accessory bus to the juicer and one wire from the point frog to the juicer , simple set up. I have just done away with the control panel on Cromer Road, converting the panel to an LED display using DCC concepts components, interesting finding the cause of an intermittent short. My operators love using an iPad to operate the layouts with wires and remotely from the layout. DCC operated layouts including points and signals are no different to work with just need a methodical approach after which you would never want to switch to DC. Slipping in that New scenic feature becomes simple. The skills of fellow modellers will aways help with the frustrations.

With the ESP Aegis 5 amp wireless system for use with NCE powercab now commercially available, I am really interested in finding the views of users. Various posts have commented on the cost of the system, as a “fan” of the DCC concepts style there is no doubt the layout and the ability to fit to one of your baseboards does make it cosmeticially appealing for hands free operation . On both of my layouts which have appeared at exhibitions I have used the Wfi Trax module, the later module allows a direct connection with The NCE PCP without requiring the need for lead and socket, simple replacement of the NCE pcp with the WiFitrax module. The WiFi Trax module wfd-30/31 sourced for under £100 and using Wifithrottle or Enginedriver certainly makes a cheap option for WiFi control and mobility for controlling the layout. With numerous old IPhones available, they have served as a well addition to operating the layout and user friendly for operators. Leaving the powercab handset in the holder on the layout and roaming with a iPad mini or iPhone certainly provides the opportunity for handsfee operation and not necessarily from the rear of the layout. On my layouts I use the DCC power alpha 5 amps which is similar to the Aegis power rated system. Inclusion a WiFi controlled wireless control for approx £100 compared with the ESP Aegis I am interested in fellow modellers views . Using the ESP system for wireless control panels works well with the WifiTrax set up also as I use this for an LED schematic for block occupancy and point /signal states.

Hi there in response to yiyr query on peco short crossing. on my DCC layouts with diamond crossings , I like to wire the crossings in the way outlined below and after 7 years I have had no issues. Firstly All the points joining the crossover I put insulated rail joiners in as the crossover is independently wired. The two leads wires from the K crossing the knuckles I wire to the DCC bus or too your dpdt throw switch connected to the DCc bus for when the associated leading point is thrown. The two wires to the frog crossings I wire to a Frog juicer, I tend to use the TAM valley duel one , not the six one as I prefer not to have any frog polarity switching by any other point so the crossing is self contained. From the frog juicer just wire to your DCc bus. DCc concepts web site was some interesting articles on wiring diamond crossovers on double junctions . Any problems email off the forum

There is no Doubt Ian has demonstrated over the years layouts don’t have to be over complicated with points and large construction. Ian has over the years migrated the various scales and proved that interesting layouts can be built. Having spent ages observing him run Otterburn in 4mm scale , this still remains etched in my mind from the late 1970’s as a design with plenty of interest. Over the years Ian has produced several layouts including the venture into 7mm scale. I Seem to recall a 7mm version of Newcastle NB , this appeared in the late magazine of Model Railways Illustrated (MORIL) including an article on building 7mm rolling stock. If any followers have a copy of the article I would be interested in a copy off forum please. There is no doubt Ian has had a proliferation of layouts and many articles in the other magazines other than the Railway Modeller. With reductions in disposable income and the current costs of locomotives, be DCC or analogue, there appears to be a resurgence of simple layouts very much reflecting the experience Ian Futers has shared with the railway modelling community though the years.

The announcement that Revolution trains are to produce a new model of the Class 66 locomotive with the options of the various variants, comes as no surprise given their previous choice of Class 59. This is a natural progression of choice I think. A Mail Drop from another forum announced the Revolution intention, and whilst the question was raised of further duplication. However this is a good example of Revolution challenging the big players in N gauge and raising the standards. The original models of the Class 66, a similar statement was made when they released the “Sheds” in their ranges. Whilst each manufacturer has tinkered around with their models making changes mostly to the fitting of the type of decoders, there has not been any radical changes, and the representation of the variants dated and long over due development. Simply reading the specifications Revolution are proposing , a smaller decoder fitting compared with the Next 18 or 6 Pin decoder and options for additional lighting functionality; there becomes no comparison. The challenge shows that the main stream manufacturers need to up their game in the market of models in their ranges. The proposed simple design to access bodies to add the decoder either sound or non-sound equipped is a game changer and the Revolution team should be congratulated on the advanced features. This is one example where duplication is good as Revolution have aimed to address the technical changes now available to ensure the longevity of their models, with flexibility to cover the large variants. Without referencing the original release dates of the Sheds I expect this to be nearly 10 years hence comfortably state dated. The early releases I look back and see for how long they were withdrawn from production whilst fitment changes made for the decoders . One manufacturer announcing sound variants either of the shelf or as an owner fitting this appears to be over 12 months. Thank you Revolution for improving the Choice of 66 locomotives, being the most numerous locomotive on the network today. This is clearly a case of duplication works to the advantage of the hobby .

As a modeller with and interest in the West Highland Line, Revolution Trains deserve congratulating on the design of the Mk5 sleeper coaches . When the announcement was made I don’t know how I missed. A quick email to the team at Revolution indicated that they had no free Stock of the Fort William Set and a suggestion to try their registered retailer network. Success , I managed to buy the Set representing Fort William Sleeper set. Running on the Layout absolutely stunning and the use of the magic wand to switch the lights on an off certainly better than fitting function decoders in each carriage. Whilst revolution have produced the Class92 in the Caledonian sleeper livery, could you be persuaded to produce the Class73/7 in the correct livery . Looking at the Dapol class 73 model with a view to conversion, this is now dated compared with the offerings from Revolution Trains.

The revolution team should be congratulated on the production of a decent Class 128 DPU. The long awaited model could be a taster for what can be achieved with many of the longer chassis designed DMUs, can’t wait for the Class 120 DMUs to appear having travelled miles on these in my younger days These classes of DMUs, certainly didn’t bounce around compared with the shorter chassis DMUs class 101 , 108 and 105s . Those 120s where the buffet bar had been removed , certainly made a comfortable area to list down after one to many lemonade shandys waiting for the last train home. With the receipt of two class 128s and fitting a Zimo sound chip, with the sound file of the Leyland Albion. The revolution design team have certainly given vast thought. At the time when the model was announced, I don’t know if the option of sound fitted or non sound fitted was given , however seeing that the models come with pre-fitted speaker, this is a welcome design consideration. I can vouch for the best of the sound files representing the reproduction of the Leyland Albion sound for the prime mover. Lowering the sound level reduces the distortion and checking the seal on the sugar cube speaker pays dividends. Select the function to hear the second engine, the sound is awesome. Tweaking a few CVS the reported distortion disappears and the level is acceptable for home use. I find sound fitted locomotives in N Gauge at exhibitions the sound is lost. However, when at home it’s acceptable and after a period of time is not over powering. I would be interested to know through this forum which are the other distributors of Class 128 DPU sound file I have two different ones downloaded onto a Zimo next 18, one is streets ahead of the other and is he I remember the Class128 DPU , being thrashed. I will add I generally avoid buying models with the sound file already loaded on the chip preferring to consider the aftermarket offerings. The release of this model by revolution trains; and when I compared the models released in the last 12 months by the alternative manufacturers represents a significant challenge to the main stream N Gauge manufactures who really need to tighten their quality control processes.