61656

Pete, Just catching up on some great picture and videos. Seeing your layout has kept me going through a dark phase of wondering of all the wiring is worth it! The 40 video inparticular reminds me why it’s worth keeping going. Keep on posting and taking pictures - its the only thing that gets us lesser mortals to plug the soldering iron in again! Andy

A long overdue update. The wiring has continued and we are definitely on the downhill straight; board 5 of 7 is finished and tested, that means 37 of 48 point motors are now fitted, which equates to 37 capacitors, 74 diodes and around 150m of wire so far. Boards 1 and 4 were relatively straightforward, having a handful of point motors each, boards 2 and 3 are only plain track so were easy, board 5 has 18 point motors in under a metre of layout length, with 8 of them for the 2 parallel double slips. There has been significant use of swear words, but a class 33 negotiated everything on board 5 beautifully last night. Board 6 is now in progress, which has involved some removal of baseboard framework as the track wasn't laid as exactly as the paper templates had. The end is very definitely in sight and the imminent arrival of a class 85 is keeping me going. There is also a more pressing deadline, which is that Christleton will be moving house in late February. Hopefully it will go directly from one house to another, but there is a possibility of a brief spell in storage as the sale is proceeding much faster than the purchase. The new house doesn't yet have an allocated model railway room, but a temporary home in a bedroom has been negotiated (there is no chance of it staying there). A new room is planned alongside a new garage (to quote Sir Humphrey Appleby, in the fullness of time). In the meantime I fully intend to have the layout working as a distraction from the reality of restoring an old house. This is board 1, the first to be completed. Each point has its own capacitor and a pair of diodes to select normal or reverse, the feedwire to each point (colour coded brown) is numbered using beads from Amazon. The negative (common return) for each motor has a blue sleeve, with the frogs being green. Inner and outer track are wired separately, to allow one circuit to be DC if required for loco testing, they are coloured with red and yellow sleeves. The next two pictures show how the double slips are motored; I did try moving all 4 blades from one motor, but decided that it wouldn't give reliable operation. These pictures show the wiring slowly being added. The track you can see is glued to the baseboard to act as a busbar, there is one for the point motor returns and one for each of inner and outer loops. The beauty of DCC is that just two wires are required! I dare say there are better entries for the bird's nest wiring competition, but I'd like to think this would be highly commended. It all works so I'm prepared to live with it as no-one will ever see it. My original plan was to have the layout working again for Christmas, something that went shooting out of the window in mid-summer when I realised I'd embarked on something far too complicated. That said, it's actually within grasping distance now, so not too bad overall. I really can't wait to see trains running again though!

It takes a lot of bravery to admit that you've made a mistake, that you need to rethink and start again. To carry on relentlessly however only takes stupidty, which is generally found to be in a fairly common supply. This then, is the time to rethink notions of using relays to control Christleton. The last few months have seen me spending seemingly endless hours constructing the south relay room. The initial under board wiring of board one went well, 7 point motors fitted, wired with local capacitors to allow single wire control and paired together where required. The droppers for the DCC bus were all fitted (there felt to be a lot of them) and split into inner and outer circles (I have a feeling that allowing the inner circle to be switched to DC use could be useful on occassion). I then decided to quickly knock up the simplified interlocking, just 23 switches, 17 relays, 40 odd diodes and some vero board. Roger Ford (Modern Railways) uses the addage of boiling frogs (a frog placed in a pan of water at room temperature won't notice the increasing water temperature until it boils) and the term could well be used here. I think the dread of admitting that this was a task for someone with a life expectancy into their 800s kept me pushing on. Finally though, I have seen the light and the burner can be turned off before any frogs are boiled. A few days ago I had a visitor who requested to see the railway; with board 1 under long term possession, nothing has run for months. Just to show him DCC with sound I ran a few trains in and out, with the layout operating as a terminus. 4 hours of running later I realised I'd missed the whole point of a model railway; at some stage there should be some trains involved. Tonight, I've satisfactorily tested that board 1 does indeed work quite nicely, running a class 25 around and changing points using a (say it quietly) length of wire and touching it to a live terminal. The perfectionist in me wants a relay interlocking, but I think 5 spdt switches will do nicely, possibly with a list of routes so I know which ones to switch. This seems absurdly satisfying, so I'm going to enjoy the moment and shunt round the 3' plank with a 25 and some VAAs. I'm not sure what I'll do next; I fancy a break from wiring but getting the other 38 points wired would make sense and probably won't take too long. I also ripped up most of the temporary fiddle yard track, so I really ought to sort that out too, I don't really fancy putting temporary stuff down again. But it would be nice to see a peak circling around... Whilst I'll be writing off more hours work than I care to add up, I have learnt lots and I'm actually looking forward to doing the next night's work on the railway, a feeling which has long been missing. Got to be worth a beer right?

I've been playing around with the point wiring for quite a while now. There's some advice that when building a model railway you shouldn't go too big too soon; this seems to have been overlooked! To make the job more manageable I've decided to do a trial area, for which the south end of the station fits the bill nicely - 13 signals, 7 points and 12 routes. This will allow me to test the concept before going on to the full layout. Christleton South Relay Room is therefore now in the detailed design stage. I did consider some really simple solutions, but the reality is that through the main junction some of the routes have 7 points to be selected; without route setting it would be far too easy to be continually misrouting trains. The system you can see drawn out allows a basic form of entrance - exit route setting (13 buttons to set 12 different routes might seem like an odd decision, but for the full layout, various combinations of 36 buttons will allow 82 routes to be set). Selecting an entrance and exit button will energise a relay for the associated route. This relay in turn will energise the required point relays; these are latched so that the position will be stored until the next route is set. Each point relay is latched and drives the point motor by a single wire capacitor circuit; this has the advantage that each point only receives current when it's position is being changed, with no potential to burn the solenoid out. The 2200uF caps should be enough to drive each solenoid of the motor with the drag of the switch rails, but they can always be upgraded if needed. Each point can also be selected individually, should local control be required. Eventually I will probably have a momentary lever in the vicinity of the stabling siding to represent the hand points.

Thanks Peter. Peaks on transpennine services were my main priority for a layout - I just remembering them bowing out when I was first interested in the mainline railway. I think the next coahing set may include either an Intercity BG or FK, there always seemed to be something mismatching in the rakes. The VGA may well get selected as the first van to get weathered - I'd like to get the freight wagons all weathered at least to a basic standard as they look so garish out of the box.

It was a combination of a Birthday and a moment of temptation at the SVR open house weekend - and some of the money goes to restoring 2968, so double bubble. The 08 is lovely and runs very well having had a lot of initial trouble transferring current from rails to motor. I have to say the model version is nowhere near as spacious inside as it real life counter part, although in fairness the real ones don't have a 6 foot speaker in the cab. I was going to have it as D3586, being the only 08 I've driven, but that is dual fitted whereas the Hornby model is air only. I didn't realise that the cabinets for the vac exhausters weren't even fitted, so the front right hand doors are longer than on a dual braked loco. Oddly the model selected by Hornby, 489, was stored unserviceable at Chester during 1986, probably because it was air only - the 3 operational 08s at Chester were all dual braked. In the parallel world that is Christleton, 489 is the obvious candidate for having been transferred round the corner as station pilot. This will of course require the services of an 03 for the small amount of engineering trains that are still vac braked (four were still allocated to Chester at the start of 1986, but all were withdrawn by the end of the year). This is probably the only loco I'll ever buy where renumbering would make it less accurate.

I really like this layout and have been watching from the sidelines from some time now. In particular the rolling stock, track and OLE are all very inspiring and helping me to extract a digit to get my own layout to the stage where I can get scenery on the go. I think you've really nailed the appearance of the track with a look I'd quite like to replicate - is there anywhere where the new concrete meets the old timber trackwork? I've been struggling for a while now in visualising how a transition from one to the other might look. Prototype photos haven't been too helpful as the subtle differences seem too subtle to transfer to a model! Great work though, and I'm sure to be back with more questions, not least on those lovely EMUs - so evocative of the era. Andy

I have spent the last few weeks playing with wiring diagrams and panel facsias, before admiting that there's only one of me and I really need a wiring plan that might be achievable within a realistic lifetime. I have also spent far too long trying to modify a Lima 87 to fit a Bachmann Warship chasis. Reality needs to kick in; the 87 project has been put to one side, a wiring plan has now been devised that might allow me to make progress faster than glacial movement. There are a few positives, not least running trains - a pleasure I'll never tire of. What seems like a small number of purchases have outgrown the fiddle yard in no time... A Class 33 arrives in platform 1 with a Holyhead - Cardiff service. These coaches are now fixed formation with the loco attached by a screw link coupling. The set is all Bachmann close coupled with a Smiths coupling hook at each end. I have a feeling this may be too fiddly to be practical, but I like the appearance of screw couplings on locos over a kadee or hook and loop coupling. The hook is mounted slightly proud of the corridor connection, which allows easy (ish) coupling, but does mean a 3 mm gap between loco and couch buffers. A 37/4 is on test from Crewe and stands on the centre road with a parcels rake as a test load. In platform 2, a 47/4, in large logo livery, has just backed on to a Euston - Holyhead service. A Bangor - Newcastle service has just arrived in platform 4 and awaits a 45 to take it North East. The 08 is about to move a nuclear flask ready for departure. The Newcastle service is allowed to go first, a 45/1 takes the rake of mkIIs out of the terminal platforms. This 45 has been the subject of trials and tribulations with a Howes sound chip - when it works the noise is superb, but 'when' is the operative word. Howes have fixed it 3 times now, but it currently sits failed for the 4th time. The 25 trundles through on a speedlink service. These wagons are all 3 link coupled and their performance is significantly improved as a result - they are easily reversed through the station throat into the sidings as required. The VGA is the latest addition, but I think the yellow ends are later than 86.

Mucked up is harsh assessment! I've tried to turn your words into a diagram. The upper one shows two signal boxes with the starter and distant combined as you have it at the moment. In this case, the distant arm B3 would be fixed. The middle diagram shows that the distant and home signals for box A have been replaced by colour light signals. The lower diagram, for completeness, shows how the signalling might look with all signals colour light and highlights some key differences between the two systems. In the upper two diagrams, signal A1/B3 can only show red and yellow aspects, whilst B2 can display red and green. In the lower diagram, A1 can now show red, yellow and green, whilst B2 is restricted to red and yellow only. It makes signalling interesting and drivers' route knowledge essential. If the diagram is upside down, its due to ipad to rmweb interface issues and nothing to do with our relative global locations!

Pete, I've quickly put together to explain my earlier comment about distant signals. The top drawing shows a standard arrangement, 3 is the distant, 2 the home and 1 the starter signal. Signal 3 can only be cleared when both 2 and 1 are green. A distant signal at green means that all other signals controlled by that box are also green. The lower drawing shows a very simple terminal station, signal 1 is now effectively the buffer stop. As the buffer stop can't show green, the distant signal can only ever show yellow. Also, a combined stop and distant signal (red and yellow arms on one post) only happens where two boxes are close together, such that the starter for one signal box shares the post with the distant for the next. This is properly in the world of unnecessary signalling spotting though - and like all signalling, you can always find an example to disprove the standard. Hopefully this is at least useful background! Andy

Work on the layout was paused for most of the last 3 weeks due to Alpine adventures. Despite the only 3 drivers passed for driving through Christleton being present in the Alps at the same time with sufficient beer to lubricate planning conversations, virtually no actual progress was made! I have though finally got around to updating the signalling plan, see above. The points have all been re-numbered and the normal position of a number of ends has been changed. This in itself was simple enough, but the subsequent revision of the route table was somewhat time consuming; with the interlocking plan on the back-burner, you may think this somewhat unproductive, however the route table also auto-generates the point motor diode matrix. This means I am now almost ready to strip down the layout and start wiring. Before I do that I need to print and check the route tables and also make a few final decisions on track layout, primarily around trap points. I think a trap point is needed to protect passenger moves over 615A points and that wide to gauge points are required in advance of 122 and 417 signals if the Up Loop is to be used for running around freight trains. I'm currently undecided on whether they are really worth the effort and whether they could just be non-working points for visual use only. Does anyone know of a working example of a model wide to gauge point? Are there any last thoughts before I sign the drawings as Approved for Construction?

Pete, I'm a bit late to this conversation having been distracted by real life for a bit. Some great progress and the 31s in particular have me inspired to go get one! A couple of comments on the track and signalling if I may: I tend to agree that the trap point needs to be a wide to gauge. I'm just coming to the same conclusion for one of my own middle roads in the station where trains can run round, although for sanity reasons I'll probably make it a non-working point only. Also, I think that your distant signal coming into Lambourne should be of the fixed variety. A distant signal can only show green if all signals controlled by a box are also green, so outer home, home, starter, advance starter (if all are provided). As you don't have a starting signal in the inbound direction, just a buffer stop, it can only ever be considered a red (although like most buffer stops, I dare say a few drivers will have given it a good go as a green), so the distant would be fixed - no spectacle plates and a fixed yellow lamp. Hopefully this is useful. I'm keen to see how you get on with your ballasting, as my own stone dropping looms ever closer. Andy

It's been a while since I posted an update on progress, and there are various reasons for that, mainly due to the absence of visible progress. In early December I hit something of a wall of frustration - firstly I worked out that my relay interlocking solution was way too complicated and would need more space than the railway itself to just house the required relays, then, half way through stripping down the Lima 87 I saw the first shots of the Hornby 87, and finally, having got the track down I found out that like running up a hill, I wasn't at the top, just a barely insignificant crest on the incline to having a visually satisfying model railway. At this point I was lucky, and its interesting reading other threads on RMWeb where progress stutters. It's easy to be fooled by the great layouts on here that you can yourself replicate within a short period of time - the mark one human being is incredibly agile in overlooking minor factors such as time, money and complete lack of ability (ref my 13th year of a 5 year period property restoration). Anyway, the lucky bit was that I'd got the railway to the point where I can run trains, so for the last 2 months, I've done just that. And loved it. The layout has been really well run over the last two months, with very few issues found with the track. There are some issues around baseboard joints and some areas where the boards need strengthening, all of which will be sorted when the boards come apart for wiring. Operating the layout has led to a few alterations to the signalling plan (and point numbering). I'll give a separate update on that shortly - suffice to say the plan's revisions led to a significant update to the control tables, which in turn were significantly simplified. My current intention is to get the track section and point motor wiring finalised to allow the board wiring to commence. Route locking and aspect controls are allowed for but very definitely punted into the long distant future! The more I operated, the more my motivation has increased and I've steadily knocked off a number of teething snags - I'm amazed by how many RTR items don't run that well straight from the box (although most are ebay purchases, so may have previous battle damage). The photos show some of the more significant progress; the first one summarises nicely the various different activities. From left to right - The 25 now sports screw couplings. Shunting the yard convinced me that 3 link was the way to go for freight at least, having happy memories of using them before. I will need some sort of platform for the cellar floor to allow me to overcome a mismatch in the requirement specifications re my height and the depth of the boards! This was something I was going to do in any case, as the layout is about 900mm from floor level and thus a bit high for the two youngest household enthusiasts. The second and third pictures show the screw and instanter couplings in 'action'. I'd summarise their fitment as fiddle factor being proportional to satisfaction! The third picture shows my first foray (for 25 years) into kit building, with a Parkside Dundas ballast wagon. This helped pass a week at Center Parcs and was very satisfying indeed. Previously I'd spent such time building Metcalfe kits, but I've realised these just won't give me the level of detail I'm after (see previous statement on overlooking time etc.), so this felt like a step in a much better direction. Deciding on 3 link for freight means that I've essentially opted for different freight and passenger fleets. There aren't many locos for which I'd planned mixed usage, so not a particular issue. The 40 will eventually become D200 which was definitely used for both freight and passenger, so a couple of barrer vehicles will available. Back to the first picture, I recommenced the 87 project, as much of this was about practising skills in any case. The bodyshell is now sprayed (Halfords rattle cans) in yellow and blue with bumper grey on the roof. It's also flush glazed, but not at the time of the photo (SE finecast as I couldn't contact Shawplan despite repeated efforts). I'm really pleased with the results. The chasis is progressing too, with shortened Hornby class 90 bogie side frames fitted to the Warship motor bogies. I just need to cut the drive shafts to length and we should be in business. I have managed to mislay the transfer sheet with the numbers and BR logo, which prompted the fitting of some small storage drawers; my fiddle yard is now visible again having become covered in unidentified model parts and tools. Next across is the class 40. This may become D200 before the wiring commences, depending on progress with the circuit drawings and availability of funds for 50 point motors. The 40 is a shocking runner; those of you who own one will know that Bachmann managed to install insulating grease on this model, which no matter how clean you get the workings, always manages to interfer with the pick ups. Fitting of secondary pick ups has had a marked but not perfect improvement; the loco still falters at the same couple of places, which leads me to believe that the A end bogie is not making continuous electrical connection to the engine room. However, its improved running and my results on the 87 mean I'm keen to get on with it. Finally there is the 45, with a bit of insulating tape on the roof, to distinguish it from it's identical brother. Whilst the other will remain a 45/0 this one is due for conversion to a 45/1 and renumbering to 45110 - can anyone recommend a website with a comprehensive list of the modifications required (it can't be as simple as plated steps and boiler access)? So in quick summary, frustration and demotivation have been addressed and I'm really enjoying playing trains. There are a few new additions to the rolling stock fleet so I'll try and get some pictures of the next running session to share.

I'm sure if ebay had existed in 1987 then Regional Railways may well have done the same. They were bad enough on surburban services, but as a replacement for almost intercity status trains they were dreadful. I hope they really did work out cheaper to operate, they certainly had little else in their favour! Interestingly 30 years later we may finally get to see what the next generation of rolling stock should actually look like with the 68s and Mark V coaches. Good luck with the sale all the same. Clearly it's only postage rates preventing me from bidding!

Great looking 47 Pete, I think that livery suits them so well. Is it a 47 436 underneath? It really looks the part with the black domino and snowploughs. Your weathering is, as ever, absolutely spot on. Andy

A useful tip. I'll look into getting a copy. I think you'd be hard pressed to call what I intend to produce an SW67! It would probably have been a Westpac or GEC geographical at that time, and I really don't fancy producing my own geographical sets! It's on my list, just below cans of Hofmeister and class 142s.

I thought about that, but I want to create as much of the 80's as possible, so relays are a key part of the model for me. Next step will be some simple circuits on breadboard to prove the theory. Do you have a thread for your layout?

Two different issues to talk about: flank protection and auto-normalisation. Historically the two were very much interlinked, but are less so in a modern interlocking. Flank protection is the protecting of the route a train takes by moving points outside the route to divert any run away movements away from the route. This is provided implicitly with a cross-over for example, where each end of the cross-over is controlled by the same command or lever. With a mechanical lever frame the signaller (signalman at the time) would return all levers to their normal position when a train had passed through the route. Hence points were designed to be in their most protective position when they were normal. With the advent of relay and later electronic interlockings, the return to normal position was not applied by default; points only move when requested by a route request. This is a good thing, as it reduces wear on points. However, it also means that trapping provision, would not inherently be provided until a route was set that called them as flank protection. Thus for trap points, and some others, auto-normailisation is provided to return the trap points to normal upon release of the route. It is not normally provided for points on running lines, unless there's a good reason. This means that all my trap points should auto-normalise. For my sanity's sake they won't (route locking of points and subsequent release based on a timer is far too complex for a model railway - although I will think about it!), but like all flank points it's easy to include them in a diode matrix and call them to protect a route at the time of setting. Beast's comments do raise some issues for my plan though, for a starter, all the points should have a normal position that provides the most protection (mostly for working in degraded mode, where a signaller should be able to assume that returning everything to normal before talking a driver past a red signal gives him maximum protection). More concerning, I've realised that there is no trapping protection between the depot and platform 5. I'll need a set of traps somewhere! I'm sure I'd accounted for this so will to compare the actual layout to the designed one - it's possible I've swapped some points around in laying them down to get the most pleasing curvature. 25 years of being a signal engineer only serves to remind me that we're almost always wrong...

Beast - some really detailed and much appreciated feedback. I'd already picked up on a few of the issues as I put together the route lists. Some issues I've addressed already, others will wait until I've completed the controls, otherwise I risk changing the normal lie of points in some routes and not others. So, in order: - Point numbering, including omissions, needs correcting. This will happen once the route tables are complete. - Shunt 419 now routes up to a limit of shunt in rear of 134 numbered 427. There are also routes there from 131 and 133, but not the bays. - I have 420 and 422 because 531 and 530 (not numbered on the plan above) are a 3-way point. 531 needs to be motored, so by definition does 530. A machine and a hand-point in a 3 way would be interesting to work out! - Shunt 414 is now main signal 118, with the old 118 now 116. - A set back from 527 isn't necessary I don't think. 129 signal has both possible routes to 135, but 134 to platform 3 can only come in with 533 normal. This is because coming in via 533 reverse only locks routes up, it doesn't free anything additional (as far as I can see). 533B through to 524 points are all back to back, there's no standing space between any of them. - a set back at 531 is a good suggestion. There isn't one because it would mean standing over a set of points or being foul of another line to have one. I intended to have one between 517R and 519R, but anything longer than a Wickham trolley would be standing foul of either 517N or 519N. - The normal lie of points is somewhat arbitary these days, unless they are self normalising. With a panel and relay interlocking they stay in the last used position, so would be included in route controls for flank protection. I'm only specifying flank protection for trap points, although as it's only saving me the cost of a diode I should may be reconsider. There's certainly nothing worse than seeing a photo of a train moving past points set the wrong way*. That said, a panel should look 'right' and probably in the 1970's signal engineers would still have been doing things like a mechanical frame. Really good comments though - keep them coming! You'll have 80 odd routes to check shortly... *Possibly there are some things worse than this in life...

First of all some loco developments, with the first electric traction arriving. It being a Lima 87 meant that a test run was never an option, but I did take the opportunity to take a couple of pictures predicting the future before serious work commenced. There are a couple of shots of the 87 having brought a Euston - Holyhead service in prior to being replaced with diesel traction, whilst a pair of 45s await their departure times on trans-pennine services. It wasn't long though before the loco was stripped down, rubbed down and receiving a coat of primer. In parallel (who says I can't multi-task?), a Bachmann warship has been stripped down to its component parts ready to be the donor power for the 87. Don't be deluded by the illusion of rapid progress - it will take me ages to get it done. I now have a massive shopping list of parts to obtain to enable me to put it back together, including new bogie side frames, windows, buffers, high-speed pantograph, handrails, pipes and cables etc. I also think this will prompt the change over process to Kadee couplings as I don't want to do the job twice. Progress with the interlocking design continues, with the controls specified for 48 routes and about 24 still to go. For each route I specify: - entrance and destination - points normal and reverse - opposing routes (routes in the other direction which conflict) - conflicting routes (routes in the same direction which conflict). This is different to mainline practice, but I've decided to do the conflicting route resolution by testing signals set rather than points locked as it makes route release easier. I also specify which track circuits need to be clear for the signal aspect (and occupied for call-on routes), as well as track circuits occupied for approach control (i.e. The signal will only clear when a train is on the approach to the signal). Route setting will test opposing, conflicting routes and track circuits with points in them, a successful test will set a latch relay and also temporarily pick a relay which will trigger a diode matrix circuit to set the points. When the route relay is latched, the signal will then test the track circuits and clear accordingly. When the train has passed the signal, the track circuit occupancy will return the signal to red. At the end of the move the operator will cancel the route, which will latch the route relay the other way. Points will also be able to be set individually, again subject to the relevant track circuit being clear. The route controls are proving that I'll need a lot of relays, some routes having over 20 conflicting and opposing routes for example. Unlike the real thing, I'll be combining circuits and making multiple use of relay contacts where I can. I've started a new sheet in the excel sheet of routes to show which routes oppose which, this shows which circuitry will be common for multiple routes and thus which can be used to reduce the volume of wiring. As all this is quite complicated, I have a three stage strategy to do the wiring. In the first stage, all the wiring will be run for the points and track feeds from the interlocking to the baseboards, I'll also prepare the point diode matrix. This can be done without interfering with the temporary arrangement which currently allows trains to run. In stage 2, a possession has been booked to dismantle the boards and do all the wiring on each board for track feeds, points and signals. At the end of stage 2 the railway will be able to operate in a simple mode with the points being driven through the diode matrix, but without interlocking or signal controls. Stage 3 will be undertaken in parallel with things like ballasting and scenic work as I suspect the actual wiring and testing of the interlocking will be enjoyable for about 10 minutes at a time! Hopefully this makes some sense and is at least of a little interest!

Love it Peter. Is that even a bent shunt pole on the front steps of the 08?

Whilst the operating department have been putting the layout through its paces, the backroom boys in the signalling department have been busy with the signalling plan and the route tables, the first versions of which are shown here. The route table will be used to generate the circuitry for a simplified relay interlocking, which will set routes, prevent opposing routes and clear signals based on train detection. A number of the points are shown as hand points, which will have modelled levers, but will still be motored, hence they still have a number. Routes will be set using a simple version of the entrance - exit principle with route locking purely on a latch relay relay for the selected route. Once I've done the route tables I'll draw up some generic circuits so you can see how it will all work. In other news, a Lima class 87 together with a donor Bachmann warship for it's bogies is on its way. I plan this to be my first project loco, as it will need a lot doing to it to be a convincing model of the real thing. This one will be in rail blue, which limits the choice of loco as about half of the 87 fleet were in Intercity mainline livery by the end of 1986. 5 of the class shared names with the LNER P2s, so I will probably choose one of those (or even have 87036 Mons Meg which was the only P2 name not carried by an 87 as far as I can work out; the name did end up being used on 86401 in 2015 though).

Thanks David Feels like it's coming together now - even Mrs 61656 has been along for a driving turn! No end of stuff to do, and the more I do the more I realise there is to do, but there's nothing like trains moving.

Thanks Peter. They look even better coming in the opposite direction as they come over the curved cross over too. I'll try to get a video of that, once I work out the best way to secure my phone in a position that captures as much of the move as possible.

Another update following a couple of running sessions over the weekend. There are some really nice operational possibilities, even with just 20% of the points in an operable state. DCC really does make a big difference; so nice for example, to have the loco at the buffers follow a departing train down the platform - although you really do need 2 operators for that. Friday night saw an operating session with my father, it's probably over 20 years since we last ran a 00 layout together. He's been busy in the garden over the last few decades playing with Pennsylvanian G scale, which explains why he needs to be reminded every now and again that we run on the left in the UK! It was good how much parallel running you can do whilst shunting and you can see the potential for more once more points become available. The lack of the through loops and the avoiding line from yard to depot do limit the operation somewhat, but it's still good fun to operate. The coaches run well, and the trucks run well forwards - I think the pivoting axle and tension lock couplers are not a great combination for shunting. I quite like the idea of 3 link couplings for the freight stock and kadees for the coaches. I can only think of one or two locos which I plan to have on both freight and passenger, so having different couplings probably won't be a big issue. Another video to enjoy, this time a class 40 crawls up to where the signal will be in platform 2, hooting and opening up as the signal clears. There's just one annoyance in the footage as the sound unit skips, no amount of tinkering with the pick ups seems to fix this. I suspect that more wheels than 8 will be needed to keep the current flowing.