john new

Hazarding an initial suggestion as possibly Whitby.

I've been thinking of putting a simple OO oval(ish) circuit around the garden pond for the summer on a simple frame/roofing felt topped base using a mix of NS set-track and Code 100 Streamline from the re-use box. To get ideas on construction I've been watching some YouTube videos and everyone seems to pin down track and some people even use a sand/cement mix ballast to stop track movement. How do you cope with the heat expansion of full sun? Obviously track laying on a hot day is one answer but then perhaps contraction leaves huge gaps? Reason for asking is in the past I remember I worked on some track work out in the garden on some club layout boards and had serious issues with the fixed down tracks in the fiddle yard bending all over the place in the sun.

Yes. You've received it without paying for it.

The NER and the GWR both proposed early main line electrification schemes. Sadly in both cases the economic conditions of the time were not favourable for implementation.

From looking at old photos where modern day open-cast has cut through old workings one of the old Elizabethan techniques used for digging/lining drainage soughs (adits) appears to have been to dig it out bigger then build the arch behind the face jamming rubble into the void. Sort of like progressing with a tunnelling shield and lining pieces. Only less safe and with no decent lighting. Presumably any subsequent settlement around the structure just jammed the stonework up even tighter than the as built condition. They were undoubtedly brave chaps. Possibly something similar but using shoring to hold up the clay too. Would be interesting to know.

To start the ball rolling for the 2019 York Show the initial updates are now on the website. If anyone spots a 2018 reference still lingering somewhere in an entry that I've missed please PM me so I can make the changes. However, other than confirming the dates no significant news yet for 2019. Advance tickets expected from 1 October onwards. Have a good summer - see you all again next year.

True, may as well!

Yes and it failed after a while with an unexpected problem. I used some recycled from advertising boards we had collected back in after the event had finished. It worked for a while creating a nice flat white surface but after a year or so the surface coating on the reverse (the original art-worked side) delaminated and came away from the card frame it had been stuck to. Also problems getting some adhesives to stick to it. (I covered it in this write up which is still on my website - the failure is covered in posts 21 & 22 )

You could possibly get away with only building one TP Unit cab end car as IIRC at least one ran around for a while with a 101 Met-Cam driving end. I think I have a photo of it somewhere. EDIT - Not yet looked for the slide to see if it will scan but the index for winter 78/79 includes an entry reading - TP unit with Met Cam trailer. I guess it turned up when I was out photting a steam special so probably at Colton on the old line not the new ECML diversion.

But it doesn't if you read it properly, even at 25mph on a preserved line with 350+ tons of tender and train behind the engine it will not stop instantly if the brakes are applied. Therefore even if the crew notice something odd and apply the brakes that moving mass will still rotate the valve gear during braking; potentially to the seize solid and snap the weakest link stage. IF they thought it was a lubrication failure issue (prime cause) creating the secondary mechanism damage that created the necessity to stop the train then going faster only has the impact of shortening the time from the initial squeek, squeek stages occurring to the final seizure, bend, boing stage. I am not going to speculate on why the lubrication supply may have failed, even if that was what it was, as that could well end up in legal actions and court proceedings (civil or criminal).

Cheers.

If we wanted a 6ft SLS promotional/publication sales stand (Society published books only) next year would that be possible and when would the event date be set? I was hoping to come and ask in person yesterday but unable to travel up from Portland in the end as I was having to finish off editing the next Journal issue as today was the final send draft to the printer deadline.

Interestingly if you go right back to George Stephenson's very earliest locomotives he tried, then abandoned, steam pressure springing via pistons in vertical cylinders which, for a raft of reasons, not least of which that the sprung effect changed the valve timings as the whole thing moved on the springs. 140 odd years on BMC then brought out hydraulic springing on cars! (Minis, 1100s et al)

As this should probably be the last post on this thread about 2018 just to advise the initial change of year updates for the 2019 Show are now on the website. If anyone spots a 2018 reference still lingering somewhere in an entry that I've missed please PM me so I can make the changes. However, no significant news yet for 2019 so no point starting a new thread for next year's show at this stage. Advance tickets expected from 1 October onwards. Have a good summer - see you all again next year.

In general I'm fairly tolerant of modelling quality provided, as others have said, the quality across the whole is roughly comparable, and the item is a fair attempt at looking like the model maker has tried to resemble somewhere in a time-frame. If you want mixed period stock make it a preserved line but with the scene settings to make it appear plausible. It is the vague somewhere on the South Coast type layout with no attempt to make the setting look like a specific area/time frame that becomes my compromise too far. Very happy to see collectables layouts, I showed one for a while, but for me a compromise too far on those are the more extreme of the never-wazzers on a show layout; but each to their own. In addition what is disappointing to me on many show layouts, although they aren't through modelling compromises, are:- In most magazine photo shoots, and often at exhibitions, the lighting is too bright making even the most exquisite of fine scale modelling look off because it ceases to look natural. Things that don't scale - water is one, sound another (Invariably turned up far too loud rather than subtle) and as others have said most LED flashing extras. Mixing weathered/unweathered items. The eye/brain adjusts to all clean straight out of the box, or all weathered, it doesn't to a mixture - the one item out of place then screams wrong. Low overhead pelmets - as a tall person they often get in the way. Fiddle yards deliberately made unviewable (as opposed to just separated off by an effective scenic break which is essential). Often I actually want to see the stock and watch the way other modellers handle working their fiddle area to see if it would/wouldn't work for me. Overly slow running on layouts that, however superbly modelled, become quickly boring because despite the modelling being superb there is nothing to grip your attention span either on the track or over the fence. At the end of the day though it comes down to individual preferences - a Cuneo painting and stylised railway posters are less accurate in comparison to a photo but it is those I have on my wall/calendars, not photos, as they capture the essence of the scene. I am ham-fisted as a model maker compared with the elite, but I like to think my layouts capture the atmosphere of the place and that is my key factor. So to sum up my compromise too far - models that have lost the atmosphere of the bit of railway they are ostensibly portraying.

Some more of today's idle musing (procrastinating) - J K Rowling’s Harry Potter wizarding world. If we assume the magical people need locomotives then what appropriate designs could Magic Railways (MR) have bought in? Electrical stuff doesn’t work properly so steam or diesel mechanical only. A logical southern outlet for the line through Kings Cross Platform 9 3/4 for ECS and wherever the loco servicing depot is hidden would be onto the West London line. (Somewhere in the Brentford area perhaps for the hidden depot?) The following could all be done based on renamed/repainted r-t-r models. Shunting locos – 08s (The nickname Gronk somehow seems appropriate) Passenger locomotives Hogwarts Castle (Hall or Castle - type to be chosen to suit modeller’s taste) Godric’s Hollow (West Country – rebuilt - Obviously they had at least one rebuilt WC as per the Taw Valley based cover) Hogwarts (Schools class) Beaubatons (Schools class) Durmstrang (Schools class) Wimborne Wasps (Quidditch class based on the Footballer B17s) Puddlemere United (Quidditch class based on the Footballer B17s) Pride of Portree (Quidditch class based on the Footballer B17s) Hollyhead Harpies (Quidditch class based on the Footballer B17s) Malfoy Manor ?? Mixed traffic Merlin (Wizard class) Aka 30740 - The one that the Muggle’s often see!! Godric Gryffendor Salazar Slytherin Helga Hufflepuff Rowena Ravenclaw Plus as many additional names from the books as necessary to suit the number wanted – all based on the King Arthurs). Freight –any ideas???

Have always thought an updated Middle Earth after the war had ended and normal life resumed could be a fun project. The dwarves inventing the trains. Bree would make an ideal junction setting for a largish layout. North South trains running between Fornost and Minis Tirith. East West dwarvish and elvish services from Lothorien/Rivendell and also through Moria to the Shire and on to the Grey Havens. Locals to/from the Shire. Given the differences in body size between men and dwarves, elves and hobbits then adding gauge differences not unlikely (Standard - metre perhaps) to add to a fascinatingly eclectic mix. Alternatively something rural and whimsical for railways in the Shire.

You are lucky it is a 158 option. For me just manageable seat wise; if that was an option on the XC runs mentioned above I probably would not use the car. If I am going on the Weymouth - London route (444s) or Bristol 15* types I can use the train option provided the times work out as there is adequate leg room.

My point being not that safety shouldn't be considered but they don't crash often enough for it to be the No 1 priority to the extent it kills comfort and, if prioritising safety is considered high then spending the cash on other safety measures to prevent the crash in the first place would be a better priority. For long haul I am forced into the less safe/far greater crash risk, but more practical and comfortable, car because any route with a Voyager only option is out of the question. I have a long upper leg and physically can't sit in the seats. Examples: several recent trips when staying over at my Mum's village to do the NRM and prior to going to Society meetings: York - Derby return, all done by car even though from a timetable perspective bus - train - bus would have done the job. Turn the clock back to the days of loco hauled and then the later HSTs it would have been train first choice as for one person fuel - v - fares is about equal. I fairly regularly do Dorset - Birmingham for meetings, again car to Longbridge then the train in - why? The option of parking at Taunton or Bristol Parkway instead, or XC from Bournemouth means a Voyager - I can't sit in the seats so the Voyager option makes both a non-starter.

What it ends up as is people can't (The tall like me) or won't actually use the trains unless they have to as a last resort/ no other option. SEATS need to be fit for purpose - the bus companies seem to have realised this with their new vehicles the train companies are going the other way. Our recent First Bus vehicles - reasonably comfy seats with an inch or two's extra leg room (good in the off peak) and plenty of standee room (shifts the queues in the peak). Crash worthiness as a priority assumes you are not just accepting they may crash but expecting they will crash often enough to make that the number one safety aim.

I think Ebay is one of those services you either love or avoid. I know several people who get on well with it as both buyers and sellers; my past interactions have been problematic and I avoid it. I'm not anti on-line purchasing just find Ebay is not for me. I think you have to ask yourself (if it is working for you) whether after the fees from Ebay are taken off have you ended up with less than via alternatives and was it easier/as easy to use. Personally I would prefer to sell in person to either a local shop or via the local model club; equally I have access to both reasonably conveniently.

Thank you. I can't afford the Kernow one, like most new stuff it may be an excellent model but is out of my budget range. I recently bought a 2nd hand Lima 33 105 - when I get round to it my TC unit to go with it will be very much a bodge from 2nd hand Mk1's. It will, in due course, be a representation not an accurate 4TC.

Excellent thread here. I note from the OP's first entry it was a struggle to find for drawings of these. Has a book subsequently become available with drawings of the 4TC units?

As an attending Society fully concur that finish times need to be early enough for folks to load up and get home. We were luckier at Ally Pally this year as the trolley out via the Rose exit was quicker and simpler despite the extra haulage distance to the loading point. As a seasoned exhibitor for nearly 40 years now load out is an issue much more often than the get in as everyone is doing it at roughly the same time. Last year (first one attended at AP as a stand holder) we were at the organ end of the hall and with the queuing hassle to get out of the car park, and then nearly another hour queuing in the van to get up the slope to the hall entrance, load out at LFoRM in 2017 was such a stress we were borderline for not taking a stand this year.

Thanks for the feedback especially the DPDT suggestion for temporary switching in.