HAB

Hi Colin, Thanks for the kind words - and yes it is all plastic apart from the York Modelmaking slates - hope I am getting the hang of it though I notice that one or two glazing bars have come unstuck. Hook switches are used for local isolation of sections. They were operated (under instruction from Control) using a "hook switch pole" which had (presumably still has!) a hook on the end for operating the switch and a long wooden handle which insulated the operator from the juice (unless it was raining!) There is a close up of one here:- http://patrickoneill204.smugmug.com/Other/Southern-Area-2012/21870427_spDK8D/1895187519_NfHn5VZ#!i=1895187519&k=NfHn5VZ This is a modern one but they have not changed much! You can see they are quite chunky things - well at least to me they are! Edit: - The same page also shows track circuit spiders - I need to do something about that also! Best wishes, Howard.

Hi Rod, Many thanks for the kind words! No, the ramps are home made, but I cheated more than a bit - they are actually fret waste from the Scalefour Society Lever frame kit. The tapered bit of waste between the levers is, coincidentally, exactly the right shape, just needing the end to be bent down. Since my frame has 30 levers, I will probably have enough ramps... I know that is not a very helpful answer unless you also need a mechanical lever frame! Sorry about that. I am not aware that the society sells Side ramps - they do sell end ramps, but I think that these are the LU forged pattern rather than the bent-rail SR pattern. They look very nice - if you are modelling LU!! C&L do something similar - http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=346_347_360 Sorry I can't be more helpful on this one. Cheers,

Then the answer is clear and the discussion academic - but no less interesting for that Good luck and looking forward to seeing the result! Best wishes,

Well, over complicated it might indeed be, but it was how the GW did it! (even though the Southern never did it that way, and the LNW would have used 6 levers for the two crossovers and had no shunting signals at all) Here is what it would look like... Of course, just because that is how the Real Thing might have done it is no reason to do it that way on the model - (depending on how the track is to be built - if it is Peco, it can't be done that way!!!) Hope that is a bit clearer! Cheers,

The GW seemed often to use three levers in this double slip situation - here is an extract from Exeter West to illustrate You can see that both sets of switches at the same end of the slip are worked by separate levers, but one set of diagonally opposite switches are worked by the same levers (53A/B and 54A/B in this case). In this case, the other switches work as one end of a crossover. (ie 52A/B and 43A/B) This frame at Exeter West was installed around 1960 (and is extremely well laid out BTW!) Cheers,

Absolutely - will update progress in due course. I did plan out the third rail before I laid the track - hence you can see that all the under-rail trunking is in place ready for the cable connections to the rail. I am currently looking at getting some etches done for things like two bolt fishplates,rail-cable connections and for hook switches. Progress has been a bit slow of late because "somebody" inspired me to overcome my phobia of plastic and get on with some buildings.... Hope Berlin was good BTW! Best wishes,

Many thanks for the kind words Colin! Hopefully, this is giving you ideas for the New-Newhaven! Although I did some compression of CJF's layout, it is nonetheless exactly the same concept. Of course, P4 requires MUCH less space than the equivalent 00 trackwork.!! Best wishes,

Indeed so and I am planning a couple of possible ways round this and will let you know the outcome of my trials. I've been more focused on buildings than stock of late in truth - you have a big head start on me in that department - but I am waiting for the Sub with much anticipation! Best wishes,

Just going back to roof vents... ... and to mention that the Keen Systems vents - discussed in these page some while ago - http://www.keen-systems.com/Pullman.html ... arrived in the post this morning and they are every bit as good as it says on the tin. There are one or two with a slight mis-match at the part line but much less than the typical metal / lost-wax casting. Now all I have to do is fit them... Cheers,

No problem for a man of your calibre and lots of friends more than willing to help with that of course... Best wishes,

... but in P4 this time of course .... Cheers.

Useful discussion - thanks to all and especially Rick for originating it. Cheers,

Hi Mike, Many thanks for the clarification. Just one further clarification for my benefit please - is a 3-3 necessary for blocking back outside a home signal even where an outer home is provided (not in regard to this discussion but speaking generally). Cheers,

Hello again Rick, Told you the experts would be here soon Hello Chris, Mike - fully agree with and support everything you say here - but just to remember that Rick's original brief was that it SHOULD be quite densely trafficked, with quite a specific - if un-protoypical-for-the-North-of-Scotland - list of movements! Chris - would simultaneous acceptance without outer homes still be acceptable even if - as in Rick's case - the two home signals are less than 440 yards apart - ie, one home is within the clearing point of the other? That was my only reason for suggesting what I did. Cheers,

Hi Rick - getting there - will look in a bit more detail when I have a mo. I would have thought banners very unlikely in such a rural environment - the usual solution would have been to provide tall posts to allow sighting over the bridge, possibly with co-acting arms lower down the post for short range sighting. Cheers,

Hi Rick, Signal 19 makes sense in that context. but it does imply the need for an advanced starter at that end at that end as you suggest. I concur about 11 and 12 and the Advanced would indeed be the section signal - locked with the token. I am not sure about the outer homes - if they were 440 yards beyond the Advanced starter would that allow the acceptance of a train even if a shunt move were in progress? I think not - but those more familiar with single lines will express a view! On another forum there was lengthy discussion about the simultaneous acceptance of trains on single lines where traps were not provided at the ends of loops. I was thinking about why the TCB sounded "wrong" yet I also understand what you say about a short token section - then it struck me - surely if the junction were "close" then that section twixt station and junction would be double track? Single line junctions without loops were pretty rare after all. you would then just need a crossover and two dummies at that end. That would certainly solve a lot of issues! hope that helps, Cheers.

Rick, Looking good! - always glad to to see people wanting to signal properly (whatever that might be:-)) Just a couple of quick thoughts:- Can you just go through the need for 19 not sure why it is needed - c/os were pretty rare on similar prototypes - and with loco hauled train splitting and joining needs some interesting shunting - presumably 8 allows the tailing end of a branch train to be shunted on the back of an arrival from Kyle? - Interesting idea to split / join trains but it does imply some long loops - as you say, this would imply two boxes - the LMS did not do too much investing anywhere! - I think that shunt signal 11 is "wrong" - you can't have a shunt signal giving permission to enter a single line (passing the section signal). You could use a Shunt Ahead (which I presume 12 to be). But a simpler arrangement would be to have an Advance Starter in place of the Limit of Shunt and then just use the Starters for shunt movements. Small trivia - I see you have TCB to Ullapool yet you have a mechanical distant under 4 and a mechanical section signal over 24 - for TCB automatic signals would be more typical - it would be a bit pointless to T/C a whole single line block section yet to have mechanical signals at both ends. Not sure that TCB was ever that common on single lines unless there were some kind of CTC. Would RETB (boring!) not be more usual? Hope that helps as a starter(!) and looking forward to all the expert replys! Best wishes, Howard

Colin, Another detail question - just looking at the axle box lids - the Hornby bogie has "trailer" type lids whereas the Kirk one has the "motor" type - the band across the middle is the locking piece for the end float adjustment. I think the Kirk bogie is wrong in this regard. http://www.southernelectric.org.uk/preservation/news/img/cd2090_11.jpg Unfortunately, that means that the Hornby motor bogie is also wrong... http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_12_2012/post-1-0-49729500-1355775533_thumb.jpg The problem with CAD design is that it is too easy to "cut and paste" methinks! Ah well - just detail I suppose... Looking forward to seeing the painted job!! Best wishes, Howard.

Well, the Man builds all this fabulous stuff, then leaves half of it out in the Garden! I had been wondering where it was going to fit! Fabulous work as ever Ron, Best wishes, .

He he!!! What you need is well connected friends is that not right Mike!!! Best wishes, Howard.

You can completely trust us Colin - it is just the people we tell you can't trust... Mike - you could be onto something with those Keen vents! Certainly look the best bet so far... Good news is - I just put in a small order - bad news - it was small because he is running out! Worse news is that the chap who cleaned him out was not Colin - job could be held up! They will be in stock again in six weeks. Not expecting my order for 2 weeks or so but will keep everyone posted. I did give Roger a heads up that he might be besieged with orders for these things(!) Best wishes,

They are certainly listed on the precision site:- http://www.phoenix-paints.co.uk/no-nonsense-kits/products/castings/cw310-sr-shoe-fuse-box-4761.html But ominously, it says "Only 5 left" .... Cheers,

Hi Colin, They are separately applied and they are the correct width - however, they are circular in elevation - so not perfect but probably as good / easy a solution as any. Good luck getting spares though - none when I looked. The least Hornby could do (having pushed us all down the moulded-on-solid route) is sell the bits loose. Can't imagine the market is huge though as you point out!! It looks like all Maunsell era and later vehicles had the same kind of vents (judging by pics) until the BR shell vent (in three types) came along. (BTW, I am not really a roof vent nutter, and seeing how I have wrecked your thread, I am almost thinking that ignorance was much more blissful! My interest in all this roof stuff is because I am about to convert a Bachman Cep (available for £69 by post from Liverpool) to one of the prototype units and guess where the main differences are...) Best wishes,

Hi Colin, Just before you have a go at making one - why not make a pattern and have some cast off it? The difference being that a pattern has to be made too big to allow for shrinkage. I am not an expert, but I think the idea would be to make a "pattern for a pattern" ie you make one in plastic, use that to make a mould to make some wax masters which are then used to make a small number of lost-wax castings which are then used as patterns to make a mould from which white metal or further waxes can then be taken (phew!) - hence you have to allow for two lots of shrinkages. My suggestion is that if you had a word with some of the people who do that kind of stuff (Dart Castings? S E Finecast? Slaters?) they would do all the techie stuff and you just make the original. Whilst it would not be cheap, I am pretty sure that - with the number of people following your threads - you might never sell more than a few hundred on! Certainly I will put my hand up for several dozen! Either way, I am looking forward to seeing the one you make but can't help feeling that it will be a bit lonely on its own! BTW does anyone where one of these might be "lying around" waiting re-fitting to a roof? Best wishes,

Amazing - but: oh dear - it is one of those "given to me by a mate" jobs - and Larry says he is now using MJT - and they are very nice but - judging only by the picture on the website - are also lacking in the width department. http://www.dartcastings.co.uk/mjt/2940.php But Larry's pic does prove that these things can be done: the issue being these days that no one seems to be developing new components - only selling "old" ranges. Perhaps Bill Bedford could be persuaded to do some using his rapid prototyping approach? Cheers,