Rods_of_Revolution

The concrete L sections are substantial enough for their position and as 47707 said they will be reinforced with steel. During rough seas it's the base of the wall that takes the most damage so the upper section doesn't need to be as substantial as the lower section. Cheers, Jack

That's a really nice model, the knackered roof and corrugated sheet repair really contribute to the rural station feel of it! I'm sure the Mk1 will be cracking once complete! Regards, Jack

It's looking good Rob, I'm glad to see you've got RSJs/lintels in there, simple engineering yet many people forget them! I'm sure copper clad would work for the points and I'm sure a strip of copper clad can be worked to look a little more prototypical for the tiebars. Cheers, Jack

I was assuming that as the military were moving bricks on pallets during the Second World War the idea would have caught on in civilian construction projects shortly after, as one would assume after the war there would be many many pallets knocking around and lots of construction projects to rebuild Europe. Certainly during the 1950s in the U.S., pallets were very common; there was the famous case of a bloke in Los Angles building a tower out of 2000 of them between 1951 and 1953! Perhaps pallets didn't take off as quickly in Britain, unfortunately I wasn't alive back then to know! Cheers, Jack

The foundation would be concrete much as today, the walls may or may not be cavity walls, so you can choose which you want to model. Scaffolding would be similar to how it is today, though there probably wouldn't be any if you're only modeling the foundations and a few courses of bricks. I think the bricks would arrive on pallets, being removed from the pallet by the labor as required, as to what type of pallet, it would be an earlier pallet design of some sort. Regards, Jack

Now you have the arches and the start of the woodwork for the upper level in place, I've got a much better grasp of what you're doing; it looks great! Cheers, Jack

I wouldn't be inclined to force extra wagons into rakes, just run them at the length which fits nicely. There are plenty of examples of short trains, Carbis Wharf was served with a single Clay Tiger or sheeted PGA, Drinnick Mill was served with a single Polybulk and single slurry tanks were often found in a short Speedlink rakes with a couple vans or clay hoppers. Especially in the Speedlink era short trains were common and could contain an interesting mix of wagons. If you have a public loading wharf you could include other traffic such as Seaweed in HEAs. If you like older smaller clay dries then look to Stoker's thread, he's produced some nice drawings that would make an excellent basis to scratch build a small dries or bag store: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64222-china-clay-building-scale-drawings/ You could also mix new and old, there were many traditional clay dries which were adapted, extended or supplimented with newer buildings. Cheers, Jack

Probably since railways first started moving china clay, but certainly from the early 1900s onwards. Cheers, Jack

Of course, converting to P4 would mean that the stock couldn't be run on other OO layouts, such as Pallet Lane! Regards, Jack

I'd have thought that would be the single most important criterion when designing a locomotive! That said, it would seem that the Class 70s have a tendency to act like a giant hot plate, perhaps negating the need for smaller ones in the cabs! Regards, Jack

Obviously thoroughly testing the 70s, including the hotplate with a few cups of PG Tips! It was a nice day out, apart from the freezing wind! Your photos have come out nicely! I still haven't processed my shots! Cheers, Jack

You can try changing the units in the Silhouette software. Go File>Preferences...>Measurements Tab and then change the units, I think the default is Inches. Cheers, Jack

They would almost certainly use wooden sleepered points. The reason is that points vary so much in their geometery, so it's easier to build them bespoke for each location by cutting down timbers, you can't cut down concrete sleepers. I didn't realise it extended through, that makes sense then. Thanks! Cheers, Jack

Can't "Druhe" also mean "other" rather than second? Let me know if you find out for sure, I've always assumed it's the same as Austria. Are you going to weather some of those locos Squeaky? Roco have done a great job with the models! Cheers, Jack

I think Marian's post would be correct if the station was a German station, the Austrians number the tracks the other way around and the Czech system was once part of the Austro-Hungarian system and so I believe the numbering would be the same, though I could be wrong. My understanding is thus: If you're travelling away from a main station, Vienna for example, then as you approach the next station, the main running track is Track 1, the track to your right is Track 2 and the track to your left is Track 3. So if you approach a station which has a single loop on your left, that station would only have a Track 1 and a Track 3, no Track 2! The track numbers are not the same as the platfom numbers, which are normally numbered in the conventional way. Cheers, Jack

John Vaughan mentions an 03 being used on the St Blazey to Wenford in the interim between the Panniers and the 08s (An Illustrated History of West Country Clay Trains, Edition 2). These are the dates I have written down, hopefully someone can confirm? D2127 24/08/1964 arrived St Blazey 14/05/1967 Reallocated to Laira D2129 07/10/1961 Arrived St Blazey 11/04/1965 Reallocated to Landore D2183 21/04/1962 Arrived St Blazey 19/05/1962 Reallocated to Laira 08/11/1964 Reallocated to St Blazey 14/05/1967 Reallocated to Taunton Cheers, Jack

I found a list I made of the 03s that were at one point or another allocated to St Blazey, it may be incomplete though: D2127 D2129 D2183 Cheers, Jack

Class 03s were definitely used in Cornwall, there were several that were allocated to St Blazey over the years. At least one was also used on the Wenford Bridge route before it was replaced by 08s, as unsurprisingly it lacked the grunt to tackle those workings! Cheers, Jack

The seawall as far as I'm aware is the responsibilty of NR. It was built by the South Devon Railway, which became part of the GWR, then part of BR, then Railtrack and now I assume NR. Cheers, Jack

Agreed! The nearest track is known in German speaking parts as the "ladegleis", or in English "loading track". The middle track would be Track 1, the track nearest the station would be Track 2 and the road the shed siding leaves would be Track 3. Track 2, the Ladegleis will have a weighbridge on it, it's normally a little building next to the tracks with a short section of track on a large steel plate. Basically the wagons would be propelled into the siding being weighed as required. In your era it may be out of use, or still in use, either way it will probably still exist because Continentals are less inclined to demolish infrastructure that may be needed again, unlike Britain! Keeping tracks away from being parallel looks to my eyes like an arbitrary slice of reality, it feels in a way a little more natural and even makes the track seem to flow more fluidically. You also get the bonus of extra length! Cheers, Jack

The track plan is typical of many stations built during the Austro-Hungarian Empire, it's a very functional track layout and provided the tracks are the correct relative length (as yours are) you can't really go wrong with it! I look forward to seeing it progress! Don't forget to put wasp-stripes around the base of the lights, put black and white edging on the platforms and make sure there's more grass than ballast around the track! Cheers, Jack

The lights look quite effective, I looked at the picture before reading the text and I'd see you'd added lights, though I didn't realise they were are as simple to make as they were! Cheers, Jack

For what it's worth I opened that file in AutoCAD and it looks completely fine. There are no hidden lines or anything and the bars are all a consistant .42mm thick. What I think may of happened is that the cutting mat shifted for some reason. The cutter is "dumb" so if, for whatever reason, the cutting mat got stuck or slipped .2mm during the cut then the machine would just carry on regardless. It looks to me like it shifted .2mm either towards or away from the machine. Cheers, Jack

The refined idea it not much better than the existing set up because you're relying on the seawall to support the track, so when the wall fails the track bed collapses with it! With your original design the issue you that you run into is that when the wall fails it can collapse back into the plies supporting the track slab potentially damaging them, backfilling around the piles supporting the track slab prevents that. Regards, Jack

If you're running in the hydraulic period I'd probably leave out the Class 37, they were not common until the 1980s when they replaced the class 25s. I'd also remove the Class 14, as I'm not sure they ever worked in Cornwall, though I'm happy to be proven wrong! I'd use a Class 08 in exchange for the Class 14. As has been said above 33s were a rarity in Cornwall and I don't think they would have been seen at all in the hydraulic era. Class 03s worked at St Blazey as well as around Plymouth, so they are fine. as are the 08s, 22s, 25s, Hymeks(rarer), 42s, 43s, Peaks and 52s. Cheers, Jack