Kelly

Those bi-planes look great I always struggled with the stringing, until I started using stretched sprue for it (this was years ago). One of these days i'll make a start on the Vulcan I have in the pile, I kind of regret selling off all the unmade plane kits I had a few years back due to space and moving restraints.

The key will be how it is for the following series and if they learn from any feedback they're surely getting. Though filtering out the Clarkson fanboyism feedback is probably not an easy task...

Not much to update with at present. I've gotten the first board painted however (in plain white emulsion) to protect it from any damp in my flat (my flat being an old 60s/70s council flat is prone to condensation/damp) as best I can. Next stage will probably to give it a spray of a green colour I probably. I've been playing about in Templot trying to see how curved boards to add a 90o at one or both ends might work out. Being P4 this means said boards will likely be rather long. It'd be impractical though to have a curve board attaching to the end of the crossover unless I hide the second set of tracks joining back to to the others under scenery perhaps. It'll take some thought i think, but it would allow at least a traverser to be placed at a 90o angle and easier to set up in my flat. Though it could well mean losing the hidden sidings, but they might well be able to just not be connected with the curved boards attached, and used to have stock ready, though how that'd work i'm not sure, it would be quite complicated for those to join the curved boards though. Again a bit of thought and playing around in Templot needed I think. In the next couple of weeks I'm going to make a start on the first P4 point, though it likely won't be used on the layout as I've used mostly B7/1:7 points (kit is a B6), but it will be fine for another smaller plan I have, which I might work towards getting set up sooner than this one in some respects as a test bed.

Your efforts continue to be impressive, well done As I've previously said, N isn't my scale/gauge, but I have an interest in the technology being used here (3D printing) and am impressed by the outcomes so far. Hopefully one day it'll be more suitable (and cost effective) to consider 4mm, but I suspect that is a long way off, until then I'm going to look to try my hand at new bogies/cabs etc for what I need, as that is likely doable at least.

I don't know why but I found the US top gear amusing, just from the sheer stupidity of it. Sometimes you need stuff that is stupid and dull to pass the time with (I've yet to bother watching nu-Top Gear).

And then you stop it being visible to the disabled or children. So not a very ideal solution, but then neither are barriers.

They don't offer online ordering. You'll need to write or phone them. Better yet see them at a show (they usually do ExpoEM, Scaleforum, Chatam and Ally Pally to name a few). Dave and Mick (who helps run the stand with Dave at shows) are both very friendly and helpful.

Are you using Peco code 100? that might account for the derailments perhaps. It is a very interesting period to model, with lots of historical possibilities (bombed out buildings, units etc, armoured trains (they armoured an N as well as some on the RH&D)). Keeping curves and points are 'flowing' as possible is the best way to try to get better running in many regards. Before ripping up and starting again though, give a package like Anyrail a try and knock up a few plans to see what fits and so on. I've found it helpful to do similar for my own layout (though that is P4, so I've been using Templot, but I'd not recommend that option). A fiddle yard->terminus might work better and allow longer trains with careful thought perhaps.

I really dislike barriers personally, as people seem to use them as a place to congregate and chat whilst leaning on them, blocking access to others I've found, particularly at larger shows. Equally perspex screens are not pleasant to view a layout through, they can often distort the view, especially if they've been scuffed in assembly/break down a few times. Barriers can also become a mobility issue, when in a scooter/wheelchair they restrict space that is often already tight further making moving to see a layout that much harder (not helped by afore mentioned comment about congregating viewers). It is always going to be a difficult issue to address though sadly. So for big shows, barriers are probably a neccessity brought about by too many inconsiderate people spoiling it for the rest of us. Some shows expressly avoid use of barriers though and they seem to manage it well enough.

They'd be able to apply for Spanish citizenship is the big difference, anyone else planning to relocate there would be treated like anyone outside the EU and thus would require a Visa (the same would apply to any EU country or anyone from an EU country moving to the UK). Though it is rather a unknown as to how it might work out. There are suggestions that the bigger EU countries would become rather anti-british if we vote to leave, and thus make life difficult, of course until the vote that is speculation really and going way off topic.

Good luck with it all. But I'd seriously consider not putting any money towards spain that you cant get back until after the 23rd to make sure you know what you're getting into, if the brexiters win it could be very costly or complicated to relocate there.

He;s taken on so many ranges is perhaps the trouble. So much variety of items and so much to sort through, it might be that the slaters 4mm stuff isn't in a state he can sell atm, or is in a queue behind other items he's trying to reintroduce. He has stated he spends some of his time working on 12" to the foot stuff, so that might impact a bit i guess.

At ExpoEM shows I've always found him friendly and helpful. He has mentioned that he's trying to reorganise his stock to be able to know what is what better and a lot of former kits haven't been made available as whilst he knows what the etches are, the cast items are a collection of confusion to him (this in relation to the SR EMUs mainly). So it isn't all bad news.

Army Cadets paintball challenge camouflage?

A tip to avoid this in the future, use a fine mesh material (such as old tights) over the end of the nozzel and it'll prevent the fine bits getting sucked up (and probably prevent damage/clogging of the hoover). Tape it a bit loose on the end to allow it to suck a bit into the pipe, but not enough to lodge in. You could hide the missing leg with careful placement perhaps? bagage nearby obscuring the missing leg perhaps? (I know this tip as its saved me losing tiny little beads when making my jewellery on numerous occasions, finding black seed beads on a dark carpet is nigh on impossible, so sucking them into the hoover with said addition to the end then turning it off over a bowl saves wasting potentially expensive losses!)

These units are look rather good. Even though not my scale, they're great to see regardless.

I did consider Maryon Park as a name, but something about it didn't fit right for some reason. Thanks for that. I'm still uncertain if I'll manage to fit the underpath in to the plan without a lot of rejigging as it'd have to be in a different spot to where the crossing is going to be and far enough away to be believable, etc.

So yesterday was DEMU Showcase again. A great day was had. I came away with one of these: A 3'x2' board from Tim Horn (as well as a Stormtrooper wall plaque as a gift for Richard my other half). Photos from yesterday are to be found here: So a physical start to the layout has begun. I plan to pick up 2 or 3 more boards in September from Tim at Scaleforum, then it'll be a matter of concentrating on track building really. Talking of track, yesterday Natalie decided she'd rethought the left side of the plan to do away with the single slip which I'd spent a fair bit of time getting right wrong in Templot (and corrected by very helpful people on Templot Club). So this is what I had planned before Natalie's suggested changes: And Natalie's changes: As can be seen, Natalie's changes add about 2ft extra to the length of the layout. I'm unsure which to go with. Natalie's changes do have the advantage of not needing the expense or complication of building a single slip, but the extra points and extra length are a downside. Thoughts?

Those could work. Will have a discussion at some point with Natalie and see what she thinks of various suggestions. A very good reason too. Can just imagine the station announcement making a slight slip of the tongue 'The next train for Norks...' The crossing is going to be on its own module, so it can be swapped out for a module without a crossing or with a different layout of crossing etc. Factory, Ferry and Gas Works wouldn't really work for the size of the layout, perhaps if a module on its own were to be exhibited then that could be a feasible name (perhaps each module having a name?). Rectangular has the advantage of being easier and quicker to source (I'm sourcing them from Tim Horn), non-rectangular/square boards would likely increase costs/complications/delays in building. However I am thinking of having curved end boards to bring the traversers at a 90 degree angle to the layout, but that'll be a later addition I think. I have a Mondeo estate, so fitting modules in isn't such a big concern in some respects (the 3ftx2ft board I got yesterday is swallowed by the boot). Though I do have to factor in that my mobility scooter takes up perhaps 1/3rd of the boot space, though as it breaks down it can be split in terms of placement. I suspect with the back seats down 3x 3ftx2ft boards should fit in pretty easily, fitting in traversers and stock boxes might be more difficult, but we'll see when I come to that as at this stage it is more about getting it built at home really. But withough the scooter theres more than enough room for any layout boards I might desire I suspect.

Afternoon all. Hope everyone is well? if not, then speedy recovery. Hope Jock had a good send off. A day of tooing and froing today really, into town to get a few bits for tomorrow then to Richard's for the night (rather than driving from mine to Burton for DEMU Showcase, his place is closer and means Natalie is en-route to Showcase too, same will apply for GCR event in a couple of weeks time). Looking forward to another good show tomorrow, been very fortunate to be able to get to some cracking shows so far this year (Scaleforum North, LWMRS, ExpoEM and Railex being a few). Enjoy the rest of your day and the weekend all

very impressive work!

That could well work. Will look at Google Maps again and see if that comes up with something as well as business names etc. Unlikely to be many nameboards on the layout I suspect

Could work, but a bit focused on the Woolwich area to be a 'universal' type name for a layout that could feature other areas.

Just a quick update to note that I've made changes to the first post to tidy it up and make it more of an index for the thread. I'll try to keep that updated as work continues.

I've been trying to think of a suitable name for the layout and have been hitting a bit of a wall. I could just go with Woolwich Dockyard, though none of the station or the dock area are modelled, but are suggested to be off scene. I could call it after one or other of the nearby roads too. So a few examples: Victoria Way (this is the name of the road that goes over the bridge at the crossover end at charlton Junction) Lord Warwick St ( this is a road parallel to the woolwich dockyard area) Woodland Terrance (a road I used to live on in the area) Charlton Lane (the name one of the crossings) Sand Street (the name of a former crossing) The problem with the above is they all put it in the Woolwich Dockyard/Charlton area for the layout name, which isn't a problem as such, but if I want to make use of the genericness of the plan to suggest areas like Kidbrooke, etc then it'd feel wrong. Thoughts? suggestions?