Alan Kettlewell

Good Morning, I'm completing a 7mm kit built tank loco and have a Seuthe smoke unit I'm going to fit. Synchronising smoke with the 'chuffs' would be desirable and afaik Zimo MX series chips facilitate this so I was wondering if anyone can advise which (if any) other DCC chips have this facility. Cheers … Alan

There's a useful thread elsewhere on the forum on lining plus Ian Rathbone's book and video are well worth having. Enjoy. Cheers ... Alan

Hi, A couple of years ago I built and painted a kit into Duchess of Atholl in experimental BR Blue - the chap who commissioned the job was an elderly man who actually remembered seeing the loco as a lad at Carlisle. It took quite a lot of research but the chap was enormously knowledgeable about the class, the colour scheme and lining. Anyway here are a couple of photos of the finished rendition which he was absolutely over the moon with and reckoned it was exactly as he remembered it. You'll notice that the tender incorrectly sports the logo and not the words 'BRITISH RAILWAYS'. This was insisted on by the chap even though not correct. The rather cruel closeup shows the lining being three colours red, grey and an extremely thin cream line, hard to see but as this is O gauge it could be noticeable if not there. This was all lined with my bow pen as I prefer that to transfers. After a lot of experimenting I settled on the Phoenix experimental BR Blue but first time round it came out a bit too bright , so I darkened it to produce the final shade. Colour of course is a subjective thing but if he thought it was right, then it's right. Lol.. Anyway good job of yours, and why not have a go at hand lining - it's very satisfying. Cheers... Alan

Like RFS, I also use Train Controller to operate my hidden storage roads automatically, involving a 'Line up in a block' feature of the software. A single line can hold as many trains that will fit in, as the leading train exits the block, aĺl the others move up by the same distance corresponding to the space now available. This feature only requires a single sensor (I use a reed switch) at the entrance to the block, all the rest is done by the clever software and some built in formulae to determine the distance to move up. Please note that although you said money is not an issue - this is expensive software costing over £500 for the Gold version and is predominantly for those who wish to fully or partly automate their layouts. If you are interested you can download it for a free trial from the RR&Co website. Alternatively you could have a browse through my layout thread where I explain quite a bit about some of Train Controller's features. Good luck with it and I hope you sort out a method. Cheers.. Alan

Yep - great .. Cheers … Alan

I'm the same - I have to think carefully about this stuff and usually resort to doodles to get it into my remaining little grey cell … Incidentally have you visited Brian Lambert's site? He has some excellent info on all aspects of layout wiring. https://www.brian-lambert.co.uk/ Cheers … Alan

Sorry Chris - no intention of insulting intelligence. It looks like you're there now - good diagramme. I do it slightly simpler with less wires. I don't make a separate link for the jumpers but I use the bared wires that provide track power just with the ends bared. Less soldering this way methinks. Down below the board I link to the polarity switch as shown in my simple sketch. NB - this is just the way I do it

Hi Chris, It's useful to know that the frog polarity switch doesn't PROVIDE power to the stock rail. It takes the supply FROM there and routes the pos or neg power to the frog depending on which way the points are set. So it's necessary to have power to the stock rails in the first place - and better not to rely on track joiners for this! This is easily done by a simple further connection to each side of the track bus. It sounds more complicated than it is and I can pop together a simple diagramme if you wish. Cheers … Alan

Hi, You need three wires - 1 from the frog and one soldered to each stock rail. These three go to the switch for changing frog polarity. You can run the frog wire along the small grove so it's easier to see as you position the point over the hole(s) for the wires. They would all go down through the baseboard to your point motor accessory switch. For the stock rail wires it can be a good idea to attach them to the two small jumpers you've already attached as it's easier to solder them there than to a stock rail. Cheers .. Alan

Good job. Another way to do it is to solder one long straight bit of wire across all four rails, then snip away the un-needed bits. This makes the job a bit easier as, if you use a piece of wire a few inches long, you can hold one end of the wire while you put the solder blobs on. Cheers... Alan

Hi Paul, Goodo, I use Windows 10 too. There's a number of ways to do it. Here's 3 ways shown with screenshots from my YouTube, I've added some notes. Assuming you are logged in to your YouTube channel: Option 1: Using the link from the browser... Option 2: Using the link from the video: Option 3: If you opt to use the You Tube 'Beta' version: Then ... Basically you need to copy the URL link to the video then paste it in to your post in the forum. I usually open my new post in the forum first then go and copy the link I want to use. If you don't know already, you can easily do copy and paste actions using the combination keys 'Ctrl+C' and 'Ctrl+V'. By the way this can only work if you have set your video to 'Public' not 'Private'. I hope this helps, give it a go. Cheers … Alan

Although the link in your post isn't working, it's possible to copy and paste the details into a browser and access the video that way. It's difficult to describe how to make the link from within YouTube so it can be pasted elsewhere - the reason it's difficult is because it depends on what computer or tablet you're using when taking the YouTube link. If you can say eg if it's a windows PC you are using then I, or one of us, can write up a short instruction on how to make a link. Cheers..Alan

I'm firmly in the 'wire to every piece of track' camp, which I followed religiously when building my latest layout - which has over 300 yards of track and about 90 points. Except I missed one piece! One end of that piece had insulated joiners, and sure enough, a metal joiner on the other end of that one piece of track failed within a few months and lead to a loss of power. Sod's law rules... Cheers ... Alan

The link isn't working Paul. Just wondering if you made the video 'Public' as it can't be seen by others if not. Cheers ...Alan

Hello again, Prototypical Operation I've continued to develop this plan having taken on board the advice offered - thanks again to those who contributed. I appreciate this is about a model so arguably it's in the wrong forum, but I am seeking advice about prototypical operation. If I was to proceed with this project I would want it to operate prototypically and be signalled correctly. Below is my latest plan which is designed in Templot and for better visibility of the track layout I've removed the sleepers and timbering. I've overlaid it with buildings, platforms, baseboard edges and other bits and bobs using PowerPoint. The following features and changes to earlier plans are incorporated: 1. It's O gauge (OMF) and the internal space available is 31.5 x 13.5ft. 2. To avoid the station being on unrealistically sharp curves, I've extended the right hand end return loops to run outside of the shed. 3. The previous arrangement was too narrow to form a good enough station for my liking. My maximum reach is 3ft so to allow access from both sides I've joggled the baseboards away from the wall. This allows a good space now for the station area and facilities and I've been able to increase that width to 4.5ft. Much better methinks. 4. Branch Line. To save a little space, I decided to have the branch trains occupy main lines for a short distance. I've made a double junction with the main line using a diamond crossing on the curve which avoids wrong line working by the branch trains. Like at Truro except more compressed. (Assume the junction about a mile way). 5. As per suggestions and information about Truro, the up branch train will arrive at platform 3. The loco will run round via the trailing crossover and then draw the train forward crossing over to the downline and then setting back into the bay. Hence the bay platform will be for departures only. 6. Up goods trains would usually use platform 4, a short stub along the factory line has been provided to hold detached brake vans or a station pilot, or both. 7. A further line is provided adjacent to the bay line for holding brake vans and temporary holding of goods during shunting in the goods yard. 8. The branch line descends to a terminus station - this is yet to be developed as I haven't thought about that much just yet as I wanted to focus on getting the main station right at this stage. 9. A small wharf is to be incorporated at the opposite end to the branch terminus. The branch station could very well be used by wharf employees. That's about enough words I reckon, the rest should be clear from the pictures. If I do this it may well be my ultimate layout so I'd like to get it right hence the reason I'm asking for advice from you experts on here about prototypical operation - I'm not an expert and shamefully admit I've never built a layout for proper operations in all my 40 odd years of modelling! Thanks in advance - be gentle with me … The full thing: Station area layout: Close up of the branch junction: Apologies that last picture is a bit blurred - or is it just my eyes? Too much screen time.. Cheers … Alan

Hi, The goods yard is actually accessed from a trailing connection. What you are seeing, if you're looking at the latest screenshot, is a quickly cobbled together adaptation of the earlier curved plan, done just to see how straightening out the station and running loops outside the shed would work. The goods yard connection is trailing from a goods line loop through the station, I omitted to put back in the headshunt so apologies if this lead you to think you are looking at a headshunt leading off under the town scene. You'll see it how it was in the earlier screenshots. I take the point about a bi-directional centre line - all I can say is, in my lack of knowledge about prototypical layouts, it seemed a good idea at the time. Now that the plan has been straightened out it will be easy to change this as I'd need to do some smart thinking about how I arrange the hidden end of the station under the town scene. Thanks for your comments. Cheers... Alan

A quick tinker with the plan and a measure up outside the shed shows that, with a little civil engineering, running loops outside would indeed work. Although I'd lose sight of trains running whilst on the outside loops (which is what floats my boat), as Joseph said, the station would look much better without the tight curves. There would also be more space inside the shed for other features - or maybe a proper workbench against that wall. There's about 6.5ft of space available at that end of the shed before the garden wall, so I may need to 'flatten' the loops a bit, or start the curves inside the shed. Eminently workable though. Anyway, this is now becoming a little inappropriate for this particular section of the forum but thanks again for all your contributions. Cheers … Alan

Ah yes, see what you mean and have in fact built a similar layout (OO) where one end of the station is visible - the other end running into storage loops off scene. I may tinker with that and see how a set of storage loops round one end might work, one negative aspect of that is that curved points take up a lot more space than straight ones. I've often thought of extending into the garden, But the garden is only 40 yards long ...lol. More work eg hard labour to do though and issues around weather especially up here in the north. But worthy of thought nevertheless. In the photo, shot into the bright morning sunlight, you can make out the roof of my railway shed reflecting the sunlight, just beyond the trees. I regret taking that picture now as it's revealed how much work I have to do out there! Cheers … Alan

Hi, It very well might not happen. I agree, modelling half the station would look better, but then it would become an end to end - not my cup of tea I'm afraid. I need a bigger shed, or escape out into the garden ...hmmm... I've become a bit unenthused with my current HO layout as there are some errors I've made which has made some parts of the massive scenery become difficult to reach (how many times have I been down that road?) Also it's a very ambitious project and every job seems so massive leading me to think I'll never get anywhere with it - I've also been down that road before - I never learn. A problem now is the usual maintenance issue with big layouts - one can't get on because the work done earlier requires constant maintenance. However, this is by no means a done deal. I'm back at the start when the shed was first built, as the original plan was to build an O gauge layout in it but I couldn't come up with a plan that fits my needs and fits in the shed. Always a compromise eh? Now where did I put that mojo? Cheers … Alan

Hello, Yes that makes sense and as you say, more interesting to operate, thank you. Many thanks for all the contributions, I've learned a fair bit more about prototypical track layout, and a lot more about Tempot! I've made further amendments as per the screenshot below. There are now no facing points on main lines except into platforms. The plan now facilitates up branch trains arriving at the up platform via a crossover. A trailing single slip is provided to allow down goods to set back into the goods yard. The station throat pointwork is now not so spread out, ie more condensed near the station. A single slip is provided at the entrance to the bay platform to allow access to the loco yard and head shunt. So, has this finally become a prototypical layout? Cheers … Alan

Well, thanks again for all the valuable input. For interest, here's the first draft, warts and all. O gauge is a squeeze... Some notes: At this time it's only a feasibility study to see what O gauge might fit in my shed - shed interior dimensions 31.5ft x 13.5ft. Period: late 1950s early 60s, probably somewhere in the midlands maybe ex LMS or LNER - LNER more likely as there's more stock available In the main station is a centre road to be signalled for bi-directional running (through goods or non stopping passenger trains) I decided to fit in the third line for the branch traffic - it was the easiest option after all. I couldn't find space for a run around in the bay platform so branch trains will need to run around in the main station. OR I can run push pulls on the branch line. The red markers on the plan indicate a single slip. The loco and goods yard areas are not developed yet. The branch line descends to a wharf area about 6 inches lower. From there it continues round under the right hand end and round into a branch terminus. The idea would give a nice long run for the branch trains. Very likely that part would be a future development. My layouts have to be roundy roundies - sorry shunters I'm not keen on end to end or shunting. It would be computer controlled with RR&Co Train Controller and I'd seek to automate shunting activities where possible (that could be fun!) There'd be a river somewhere - haven't decided on that yet. I may leave the storage loops open and make them part of the scenery rather than hiding them away - open to opinion on that. The shed doorway is off to the left where a lift up flap would be situated - I don't do duck unders these days. Finally - It might neve happen! Cheers … Alan

Yes space is a bit tight and I'm adapting this plan from the previous layout I once owned which was also 3ft wide - but I've put an extra through track in to provide a more busy scene! I'm currently trying to squeeze in a run around loop for the bay - it's proving difficult because the bay ends up too short with the extra turnouts taking up space. If I can, I would prefer to fit in a bay platform as I quite like that feature - so I'll keep trying. I struggle to find station layout plans so a pointer to a good site would be of help. Many thanks. Cheers ... Alan

Yes it looks like it - I'll be fiddling about today with the big plan to adapt and to see if I can get Templot to do an appropriate crossover junction where the branch line joins the main lines and a slip from the opposite side of the main line into the bay. I'll also look at options for a run around loop for the bay train - but space is getting a bit tight. This plan is for O gauge and there's only so much you can fit onto a 3ft wide board (can't reach any further). As for a third line for the branch, well space is very tight so the jury's still out on that. Cheers … Alan

Thank you all very much for the informative input. To save potentially a lot of further keyboard activity, I'd like to mention that the original query was about the wrong line running - and for that reason I only posted up a very simplified version of what is a larger plan. I was hoping to avoid a lot of additional information being added, and therefore the simple diagramme was provided only to aid easier understanding of the question. I note well the issues of the facing turnout into the goods area and thank you to all those who have pointed that out. To explain, the plan is from a previous layout I owned but that was a terminus station then, which I'm now incorporating into a bigger plan. I slipped up there and should have changed it to a trailing turnout or diamond. Apologies if this has prompted a lot of comments based on this being the final plan. There's a lot more to it but it is in Templot and too large to post all of it and see the details. I just needed to know about the wrong line working as it potentially affects other parts of the plan. Incidentally there are crossovers at the opposite end of the station (not shown). Regarding the loco yard, the full plan is actually a four road through station with a centre road for through goods and non stopping passenger trains (as explained, I didn't post the full diagramme for simplicity), so perhaps the yard may be a bit more justifiable. It is however not decided how big the yard might be because I may yet want to find space for a branch line running parallel to the main lines. Hence the topic subject. I'm still working on parts of the plan - I'm a bit slow in Templot but getting there- so when I more or less have it done I may post it up, in parts so it'll fit and some details can be viewable. So, apologies again if folks have spend time bashing the keyboard thinking this was a complete plan. I think the original question has been answered, in a few different ways, and most informative. Thanks again to all for your contributions. Cheers ... Alan

Thanks, that is interesting. So I think you're saying for that period late 50s/early 60s, the layout is more likely to be something like this? (Single slip at the branch junction added in error - ignore) Cheers … Alan