RJS1977

I wonder if The GP will still go ahead in just 4 short weeks time, it's a Street Race around the City and there is a lot of damage there.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-41327593

I don't think Mexico's a street race - it uses a shortened/altered version of the old Mexican Grand Pri circuit.

Surprised not to see any mention on here of the programme which was on C4 on Sunday evening about Guy Martin joining the Williams pit crew.

One thing that surprised me was that although his role was as a "wheel off" mechanic, he had to carry the new wheel out into the pit lane, which I would have expected to have been the "wheel on" mechanic's responsibility.

We have seen far worse conditions at starts in the past - and let's face it, had the start been under the safety car then it really would have been a procession. No, these are supposedly the best drivers in the world - let 'em race.

I don't think the wet conditions had anything to do with what happened at the start - all four drivers involved were fully in control of their vehicles until the moment bits started coming off...

Thanks,

 

One last improvement, then:

Pacific Terminus 5A.png

• Large radius points for all reverse curves.
• I think this layout needs a traverser because any points in the fiddle yard would reduce the length of the trains it could store. (More roads = more storage and more operating potential.)
• Escape route for passenger locos from platform 1.
• Goods yard with 3 sidings and headshunt that can be operated independently from the passenger side (because you said passenger alone was not enough).
• Concealed fiddle yard connection in goods shed (as I think you've hinted at in previous plans).

I'm happy to provide a to-scale PDF if anyone is interested.

 

Phil

Only thing I would say is that CJF deliberately designed Minories with the tracks parallel to the baseboard edge to enable a modeller to extend the platforms if more space became available (e.g. after a house move, or for exhibition purposes).

Not now. Track is now dry. The start was "interesting"

Yes, that's the sort of time where I miss Murray....

"The lights are out and the 2017 Singapore Grand Prix is go! go! go! Vettel's slow off the line, Kimi Raikkonen pulls alongside Max Verstappen. Vettel pulls over to keep Max behind him, and Wham! Bam! all three collide. Verstappen and Raikkonen go off, hitting Fernando Alonso's McLaren on the way. and Lewis Hamilton is up to second place! Will he get past Sebastian Vettel? No, Vettel closes the door on him - but Vettel swerves, hits the barrier, and is OUT OF THE RACE, and Lewis Hamilton is IN THE LEAD OF THE RACE! FANtastic!" 

 

 

While it may be hard for some to accept the idea of people entering the hobby as a kid via a trainset is dead - kids today simply have far too many other options for their time than previous generations.  Yes, there will still be some, but for most it won't happen.

 

 

I've attended plenty of the smaller shows over the last few years and they seem to be well attended with lots of families with young children who want to get into the hobby. But they don't. Why? Because the parents see what's for sale on the trade stands and decide it's too expensive a hobby! If they do get a trainset, it gets played with a few times and then packed away because there aren't the affordable after-market extras (more locos, accessories etc) to expand it.

I - and I am sure many like me - are trying our utmost to encourage youngsters into a hobby that's more productive than sitting in front of a screen or kicking a piece of leather around but we are constantly being undermined by the manufacturers and the "the more expensive the better" brigade. 

I don't think 'making it more affordable' is necessarily the only route (and indeed might even turn out to be a dead end) when it comes to making the hobby grow.  We all tend to think of things from our own perspective and even if we wider that perspective a little it is still mainly one of people who have already committed to the hobby in one way or another and are already spending within it.  Interestingly Bachmann seem to be doing alright with their revised pricing policy, which has seen prices increase rather than fall, so clearly there is more to the overall situation other than a matter of price, and price in any case is not the same thing as perceived value.

 

The problem Hornby, and others, face is how to find and develop new markets and then how to channel or lead those new markets towards products offering the best rate of return.  Thus reducing prices could even have the opposite effect!   I don't know how Hornby, and others, can really solve this problem - some new markets are very simple to enter and even if potentially limited can offer good levels of return if tackled in the right way (e.g. going into r-t-r 0 gauge would probably meet that remit) but probably don't broaden the market very much.  So do you go for something that brings in youngsters - arguably a very sensible course - or do you go for 'older people' who are getting past many of life's larger personal and domestic costs and have money to spend and are looking for something to spend it on; or do you do both?  But both of those examples put you up against serious competition - going for youngsters and it' a battle with computer games and 'phone apps etc while going for the greying £ pits you against cruises and holidays.

The difference is - bring someone in their 60s into the market and you have a customer for maybe 20 years.

Bring a child into the market, with the right items available for them/their parents to expand the collection into a sustainable hobby, and you may well have a customer for 70 years.

I also seem to remember reading about that when I was a little lad. I think its name was Gordon, and if I remember correctly a little engine called Thomas had a hand in the rescue.

No, Edward came to the rescue. Thomas didn't appear until the following book.

Ok, good.  That eases the problem on the 90 degree curve, both in terms of fitting it in and in maximising the length of the fiddle yard and scenic sections.  If you restrict yourself to smaller locomotives and avoid modern 70' stock (mk3 or newer), you should be ok, but check when you are buying new locomotives what the manufacturer's recommended minimum radius is before you buy them!  You will have to be using tension lock or Kaydee couplers for that radius and I will assume t/ls unless you tell me different.

 

The more room you have on the viewed 'scenic' part of the layout, the more room you will have for larger radius pointwork.  The original Minories plan incorporated pointwork of quite sharp radius with the idea of use with locomotives available in those days, Triang or Hornby Dublo 0-6-0s, 0-6-2s, 2-6-2s and 2-6-4s, all versions of locos still available RTR but the older ones were cruder and could manage much tighter curves.  I would seriously recommend using the largest radius pointwork on the visible area that you can; it will make for better running and look much better.  I use Peco medium radius on the scenic part of my layout except for the engine release crossover which is Peco small radius, and my only reverse curve.  No.4 setrack is used in the fiddle yard which, like your will be, is accessed around a sharp bend; there is one no.4 to no.3 curved point in this section.  All my RTR stock runs well through it, including a 42xx 2-8-0, but my Ratio 4 wheelers do not like the no.4 and will not put up with no.3 at all under any circumstances; the rigid couplers foul and derail them.  This may have a bearing on long wheelbase stock in your case.

 

Once you've got the boards laid, we can start planning the tracklaying.  First thing to consider here is the length of the longest train; decide how far away from the end of the board the buffer stops in the platforms are going to be, and make a mark.  Measure from it the length of the longest train, with your biggest engine, and enough room for clearance and make another mark; let's call it platform clearance, pc for short.  Now, go to the other end, and measure the same longest train with biggest engine and clearance distance from the extreme end of the layout back towards the curve and the terminus.  Make another mark; we'll call this one fidde clearance, fc for short.  The distance between pc and fc, around the curve, is where all the pointwork will have to go.  I am making another assumption here, that your fiddle yard roads will fit on to a 4' long board and be capable of accommodating 4 coach trains with the loco.  

 

The principle is that no pointwork goes any where between pc or fc and the ends of the layout, and it is all contained between pc and fc.  Now, make up full size card formers to represent the points you think you'll need and lay them out in position on the boards between pc and fc.  This will tell you the number of curved points and the radius of them for the fiddle yard entrance on the curve, and the final positioning of the station throat pointwork, and show you the length of plain track between them that will contain the scenic break at the entrance to the fiddle yard.  Don't forget that hidden crossovers for trains from the departure side of the station to access the departure side of the fiddle yard that feeds the arrival side of the station and vice versa need to go in as well, or the fiddle yard access road has to come down to a single track at some point which means that trains cannot be arriving and departing from the station simultaneously.

 

There are basically two groups of points, the station throat and the fiddle yard throat, and the card formers will help you visualise their final postions on the layout.  As the layout is semi permanent and does not have to come down for exhibiting, you do not have to worry about laying points over baseboard joins, but, again, it is important that these are level and stay that way.  If the two groups of points overlap, we need to rethink the station pointwork in smaller radii, but you should be ok.  Now, you can go and buy the points, knowing which ones you need, and lay them out in position on the boards; do this temporarily and fix nothing permanently yet.  You will be able to move the assemblies up and down a little to fit the straights that will connect them. You may have to cut or fit a final length of plain track; put it in a vice and attack it gently with a junior hacksaw, and file the cut ends down so that they will accept rail joiners.  Use rail joiners, by the way, as they will ensure smooth alignment and correct levelling.  They look ugly but to all intents and purposes disappear when the track is painted.

 

You should now have the central part of the layout, everything between pc and fc, laid and the only thing remaining to do is the plain track of the platform, siding, and fiddle yard roads.  Let me know when you've done that and we'll look at wiring and test running, and feel free to ask if any problems manifest themselves in the meantime, which they will.

Two slight elaborations on this:

1) If you are running loco-hauled trains (which were much more common before about 2002), you will probably need a loco release crossover (points) in the platform roads, a loco's length from the buffers (so the loco can uncouple and run round its coaches). The alternative is to have an isolating section (use plastic rail joiners in one rail for this) again a loco length from the buffers to allow the loco off the incoming train to uncouple and a new loco to couple on the other end to take the train out. Either option will shorten the length of train you can get in the platform.

2) Not all platforms need to be the same length. So you can have long main platform roads, but with one or more shorter roads off them which again could put pointwork in different places. 

I seem to remember reading about a blue loco of a similar design getting stuck on a hill many years ago (about 1945 IIRC) and having to be rescued.....

Although I've not seen anything official on this, it's clear that the Railroad 0-4-0s now come with a much slower motor - the top speed is far less ludicrous. 

Fair point - I replaced the chassis in my (Margate) 101 tank a few years back after the gears stripped, and it's certainly a better runner than it used to be.

Point is though that with model prices rising faster than wages (and other thing like increased rent etc digging into disposable income), there is a limit to how many models people can buy. As long as there is a static (or more likely declining) number of active purchasers in the hobby, the number of sales is also limited. Which is why Hornby (and the other manufacturers - not just of rolling stock, but all the other suppliers too) need the hobby to grow, and that means making it more affordable.

Thinking about Corgi/Airfix, are there ways Hornby could try to tie the ranges together more? (I'm leaving Scalextric out of this as it's a different scale).

As an example - how about a 'WW2' train set - suitable loco, two or three wagons loaded with aircraft spares/munitions etc, and an Airfix control tower and Spitfire?

Or throw in a couple of 'Corgi Junior' vehicles with each track mat.

And a 'freebie' booklet in the box listing:

* The Hornby Railroad Range

* The budget end of Airfix

* Corgi 'Junior' items.

In some ways it's a shame that the Airfix model railway kits are still with Dapol rather than Hornby. Unless there's some 'arrangement' between the two companies preventing Airfix/Hornby muscling in on that turf, maybe it would be worth Airfix's while trying to get back in on the 'model railway accessories' sector. 

In a round about way, Hornby have added all new models to the Railroad range, the Tornado A1, P2, Duke and Crosti 9F spring to mind. You also have the Sentinal diesels.

 

With such small locos, there are 2 questions which arise, so do they tool up the full detailed one or a railroad one? Resources probably won't exist for two sets of tooling or recovering costs is made much harder to do so. I suspect most of the market wanting an industrial (or pre-grouping tank) will prefer the higher cost detailed version over the lower cost railroad. Most newcomers will tend to start with big name locos and a loop, those starting with a small industrial/shunting plank will not need lots of  locos, one or two high quality locos will be suffice and can be used to form part of a detailed scene.

 

The appearance of Hattons P class just secured my 2018 budget, meaning that I will be reluctant to buy additional existing classes, even an extra Merchant Navy representing late BR crest, further DCC sound conversions are postponed until 2019, the Heljan L&B tank just get definitively cancelled (along with branching into 00-9), new expo layout work (which would have involved buying track and other sundries) now postponed until 2019...

 

My point is, these announcements do affect expenditure elsewhere but equally I would not have been keen on a Railroad P class.

I'm not sure the P2 and the Crosti 9F are really suitable for Railroad - nobody under the age of about 60 has seen a Crosti 9F, and as for the P2....

I'm also not sure "most newcomers begin with a big loco and a loop" - though certainly many adult modellers do. Junior modellers though tend to begin with 101 or Caley Pug and a few wagons - then what? There's a gap for more 'Junior'/mid-range small engines to enable the youngsters to expand their collections at an affordable rate. Perhaps not the P, but I think the Barclay would have made a good 'Junior' loco (though note I am *not* advocating fitting it with a Scalextric motor).

I think the Sentinel probably has the quality/cost balance about right. Not over-expensive, but at the same time runs well, and plenty of 'serious' modellers have bought them.

You make a good point about buying the P rather than the Merchant Navy. If Hornby had announced the P rather than Hattons, and sales came at the expense of sales of other locos (which have been in the range long enough to pay off their development costs), rather than as new sales, even if a new model sells well, Hornby might have made less money than they would have done had they not brought it out! Long-term, the Trade as a whole needs to grow the market, and that means more entry/mid-level affordable models.

You mention the flat being a two-bed holiday home. I don't suppose there's any chance of the layout being able to go in one of the other rooms instead, to avoid the damp problems associated with having the layout in the kitchen?

'Railroad' is quite limited- you get things you don't want but never the desirable products. I think it's their strategy to sell the unpopular stuff. Forget about Tri-ang tooling locos, more unsellable rubbish.

Personally I've no issue with the level of tooling - it's supposed to be a cheap way into the hobby, a way for youngsters/less well-off modellers to expand their collections.

The big issue I have with the Railroad range is its incoherence - not enough of any particular era/region, except for BR blue diesel which is somewhat over represented, and no prototypes from the last 30 years or so.

 based on their past business model, giving lower cost to the consumer in order to generate volume. 

I'd hardly say £99 for an 0-4-0 tank was 'Lower cost to the consumer'.

Again, I would have liked to have seen Hornby do the Barclay (and possibly the P class) as Railroad (or perhaps Railroad + ) items - they're the sort of size of loco which is ideal for anyone expanding from a train set, and having numerous preserved examples, ideal for selling to families through preserved railways - IF the price is right. And anyone wanting a Barclay 0-4-0ST for their layout would probably still have bought them anyway! Instead Hattons are bringing them out a high-spec £100 version - another opportunity missed.

But why would TR want a Honda engine?

 

 

Might I make a suggestion?  Kitchens are notorious for never having enough worktop space, so it might be an idea to mount shelving as worktops above the layout so as to discourage the putting of utensils, crockery, and other kitchen paraphenalia on your delicate railway.  Good intentions rarely survive a hot plate that you have to put down immediately!

I'd go one step further and suggest (if possible) partitioning the 'railway' part of the room off to prevent moisture from cooking affecting the layout.

BTW - does anyone know what's been going on between Reading and Didcot the last three weekends?

Each Sunday, the relief lines have been closed but the only sign of 'activity' I've seen has been a tamper sat at the end of Cholsey station all day.

I've often wondered about some of this historic racing even though I like watching it. Car safety has improved massively over the years as the old cars were just too dangerous even when newly built yet most weekends will see aging drivers driving equally aging cars flat out around circuits that lack F1's safety features. Although tragic I can only see accidents like this happening more and more.

Though many drivers of historic racing cars aren't as old as the cars they're driving!

 

This sort of attitude must contribute to a whole lot of accidents, and what shocked me was that it came from a cyclist, one of a group who should be aware that they are extremely vulnerable and benefit from the protection of rules more than most.

 

No, that sounds about par for the course for cyclists (certainly round here)- I narrowly avoid being knocked over by them on the pavement several times a day (often when there's a cycle lane in parallel) and last night after dark I got passed by five consecutive cyclists without lights in the space of a couple of hundred metres (4 of them on the pavement). I'm coming to the conclusion the main reason they have bikes is because they can't afford BMWs... ;-)

Unless RB up their game, then both Max and Daniel will have a serious chance of making Lewis and Seb very uncomfortable. And given the current performance of the RB13 Max has, both RB engineers and Renault are under serious pressure to come up with the goods. Reliability, really. If it wasn't for the almost 50% DNF rate, Max would have been 2nd or 3rd in the rankings now, with his team mate not too far behind. But "if" doesn't count in sports

"IF is F1 spelt backwards" - Murray

Ungated crossings like that are plentiful in the US.

Maybe the driver would have realised had it been a diesel, the air horns sound quite different to a steam whistle.

Given how close the train was to the crossing by the time the car even appeared, the driver should have seen it, never mind heard the whistle....

Englishman, Irishman and Scotsman about to guillotined in France for not being French

 

Englishman goes first. Guillotine blade jams. He's set free.

 

Scotsman goes next. Same thing happens. Guillotine blade jams. He's set free.

 

Paddy goes last, looks up at the blade and yells " Hold it !.  Oi can fix dat ! "  

 

Allan.

Having read that post, I turned the TV on and watched The Lucky Dog (released in 1921 - the first film to feature both Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy), and came across something familiar:

https://youtu.be/Q2j1chr3Jv0?t=800