Fishplate

The Descent to the Goods Yard So, except for one day, I’ve finished work for the Christmas break. As the railway has developed, there have been a number of things that could be done next. Having been indecisive for long enough, and not spent any time on the railway for ages, I’ve started on the descent to the Goods Yard. Below is a "Before" picture with the proposed route. The length from the top of the gradient (see post #5, Board 2 description) to the bottom (post #5, Board 6 description) is 4000mm and the drop is 65mm. This gives a gradient of 1 in 60. Progress today shown below. The alignment boards and uprights have been cut for boards 3 and 4. As mentioned previously, if we move, this is all split so that the boards can be dismantled without too much difficulty. Hopefully more progress over the next few days.

Hi Simon. I read about Hobbiton End in the RM and have read your entire topic on here as a result over the last few weeks. What a brilliant layout. Thank you for sharing, especially for those of us outside your exhibiting radius who won't get to see it first hand. Definitely on my 'content I follow' list. John.

Goods Yard progress Posting has been a bit quiet since June as other things have needed doing. However, that hasn’t stopped attendance at some very good exhibitions over the last few months. I’d been pondering for a while the arrangements into Yard 1 and 2 and considering replacing the two turnouts shown in the sketch in post 4 with a double slip due to the space available. Revised sketch below: At one of the exhibitions I attended in August, there was a boxed unused Code 75 double slip on a trade stand at just about 50% below the new price. Having not done much more than ponder about this, I took the gamble and bought it. Then I was offered several unused turnouts in code 75 by a friend who had come to the exhibition with me (thank you David), if I could let him know what I needed. So I spent a very pleasant evening messing about with Peco templates. Below is the result of my efforts, which involve three LH SL-E187 curved turnouts and two RH SL-E186 curved turnouts. These and a medium radius turnout, shown on the left hand side of the sketch duly arrived in the post. Whilst the arrangement of curved turnouts over-runs the edge of board 4, I will be hanging the control panel off that, as described in #post 5. Yard 1 pointwork Yard 2 pointwork A panel in the centre and flat ends that the tracks can run over into the yards should work ok, with some minor adjustment to ensure point operation works. With the compression of the two turnouts into a double slip, I’ve also been able to flatten the radii into the yards. This needs a bit more refinement, with room left for the descent from the high level down to the Yards. The track underlay on the top of the slope down is on the middle left of the first picture, and the plastic curve to the left of the double slip in the second photo shows the approximate location of the descent at this point. The tightest radius into Yard 1 is 24". The two plastic railway curves off the back of the double slip are 24/25" in the first photo to indicate where the track will join up to the reception road, which can be seen on the board in the picture of Yard 1. A tighter bit of plain line (18") will get into Yard 2 off the bottom leg of the slip in photo 2. The top leg of the double slip on this side will be a short length of plain line to act as the headshunt for the Reception Road and Yard 2. This also follows prototype practice as a similar sort of diamond arrangement existed at Faversham, with one yard acting as the headshunt for the other. This can be seen on the top of the drawing here ~ https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/sre/R1748.htm

Hi Colin, Thank you for your interest and kind comments. I will put some details on of a building I have constructed in the near future. John

Glad to be of help Paul. Let us know how you get on :-) John

Island Platform and Buildings (Mock-up) In Post#5 I commented on the location for an island platform. Having developed a plan with the largest track radii possible, I wanted a solution that would achieve the following: Take five coaches Be as close as possible to the trains whilst hiding the resulting ‘gap’ between the train and the rolling stock Take up as little space as feasible, as it is Goods operation that really interests me. I’ve based my design on the many island platforms that exist on the North Kent Lines running out of London to the Kent Coast. In particular, the number of individual buildings, if strategically located and combined with an overall roofs would hide the offset between the end of the coaches and the platform on the outside track (end throw). Similarly, on the inside curve where the train would be in full view, the viewing height of the railway, together with the overall roof and the side on view would hopefully hide the gap in the centre of coaches. As a prototype example I have used my old home town station of Faversham, shown below. Apart from colour schemes and ancillary station furniture this has remained unchanged over many years. These photos were taken earlier this year. A few weeks ago I started on a mock-up in cereal box and other cardboard. This was made as follows: As the platforms are virtually entirely curved, 1000 grade lining paper, left over from developing the track plan, was used. This was cut to an approximate shape and laid across the area of the platform and tracks and weighted down. I ran my fingers down the rails nearest the platform. This put a firm fold in the lining paper. A line 10mm from this fold line was drawn on. This is the standard 4mm scale offset from a track to a platform edge for straight track. My track is uncanted, so no allowance was needed to compensate for the lean of stock due to track cant J. A template was then cut out for the length of the platforms, including ramps at either end, along the 10mm line. The template of this outline of the platform surface was transferred to cardboard and a series of segments cut out. Strips 16mm high were also cut out to form the platform walls and ‘zig-zag’ cross bracing beneath the platform. These were done on very tolerant wife’s (VTW) A3 paper cutter. Left overs were used to strengthen the join between adjacent sections of platform. The end ramps were scored underneath across the width of the platform. This enabled the ramp to be folded down ramp walls. These were cut from the 16mm strips. Ramps are about 80- 90mm long (standard platform ramps have a gradient of 1 in 8) to allow for running to sleeper/ ground level. The 16mm strips were offset 20mm inside the edge of the platform to allow for subsequent trimming when stock was run past. Everything was glued together using UHU. This gave a very strong and light structure. With five long coaches on the outside track (Mk1 & Pullmans) the platform was then slid into place. This was then adjusted to give the smallest practicable gap to the centre throw of the coaches and to cylinders on steam locomotives. The platform was then held in place with blue tack (other tacky stuff is available….). I then looked at the positions of the coaches and selected the location for the subway, knowing where I wanted the station building to be (see post #5). Looking at the position of the coaches, I then started marking out where I wanted the buildings to act as view blockers. Appropriate length buildings were mocked up in card. An overall roof was added based on the platform template. This overshoots the buildings in a similar way to Faversham. The overhang is propped using a coffee stirrer. Doing the overall roof at this stage did lead to a problem though…… At the right hand end of the platform there isn’t sufficient width for a Building. As mentioned in the previous post, this will be a concrete extension associated with Kent Coast Electrification, but is also partly on the straight. To act as a view blocker here I’ve mocked up a running in board (using my bestest handwriting, sir).One has been added at the left hand end as well. Then came the task of trimming the inside edge to accommodate the locomotives and stock, starting with an 0-6-0 and building up to a 4-6-2, using a pencil to mark as close as possible to the stock. This now gives an excuse to get everything out J This is where the problem occurred. As the cuts got further in, the scissors needed to go under the canopy. The result is a bit of a chewed edge as the cereal box cardboard has delaminated. So a few photographs of the finished mock-up. Hopefully these demonstrate that the ‘view blocker’ arrangements work even better than I had hoped. The mock-up will stay in position for quite a while as I get the opportunity to run other stock through it. And because I want to start on the ramp down to the lower level and get some Goods Sidings laid and the connection to the Dock joined up. Then I’ll need a control panel etc etc etc. Next time I’ll add a post on something I’ve actually built properly rather than just a mock-up. This photo is taken from a point where you need to lean over the railway to look across the platform. A side on view. Apologies to Southern people who might be surprised to see a Wrenn Castle in North Kent. My Bestest Handwriting and a chewed up platform edge. They don’t make cereal packets like they used too………(other brands of cereal are also available). Platform Buildings as View Blockers of the Gap between the coaches from normal operating height when sat down. That well known combination of Mk1, Birdcage and Pullman coaches on display. Platform level view. Maybe “Mind The Step” but the Gap looks just fine to me……. End throw from the turnout will be dealt with later when that connection is properly wired up and sidings laid. Have fun with your modelling.

So. Two things today..... Dockside Building First, I've been looking at that gate arrangement on the Dock that I mentioned in post #6. I've widened the cardboard mock-up building, and increased it in height slightly as a result. You can do this with mock-ups.Looking at the interface between 3D and 2D, I think a van parked up against the back scene will partly hide the transition, with some dock side paraphernalia between the van and the dock wall. I've also been experimenting in pencil looking at how to blend the 3D into 2D by scribbling on a piece of card. I've made the blue circled part of the building slope down towards the backscene to try and project the perspective onto 2D. First results not great as I dredge back into O level art. A photo hasn't shown this up particularly well, so I've traced my first attempt in black lines. The railway clearly jumps up! So, experimenting in 2D, the red lines appear to show roughly where I need to be aiming. Will keep scribbling, unless anyone on RMWeb has any good tips to short circuit this blending arrangement. I've seen some great perspective modelling from 3D to 2D on the exhibition circuit. Replicating it is proving more difficult.Whether experimenting with a 3D to 2D transition on a 2D photograph will work is also an interesting experiment. Brake Vans Watching a train go by the other evening, I thought, Is it me, or is there something wrong with the white roofed Guards Brake? I'm not sure what the internal arrangements were on these, but did the chimney really pass in front of the Guards lookout? Initially I thought the lookout would be directly opposite on the other side but they are not, they are diagonally opposite on both models. So my initial thought that, perhaps the roof had been put on 180 degrees out, doesn't work. But the chimney location on the grey roofed version is at the opposite end to the Lookout, which seems sensible. So is the white roofed version prototypically correct, or have I inadvertently purchased a really rare production model? Thoughts please from those that know.

In Post#6, i mentioned that my P class would live on the Dock. It arrived today. Here are some pictures of it messing about with some trucks. I've added some details of the allocation of these locos that I found out when deciding which loco to choose. I've added that detail to the P Class page, on post #1120 here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/126142-secr-p-class-0-6-0t-in-oo-gauge/page-45#entry3170434 Anyway, enough chat. Some pictures of a brilliant model that needs a scenic Dock area to sit in. Enjoy. Including the Oil Can....... And the oil can (in the accessory bag)

A beautiful model turned up in the recycling today. Complete with Oil can. I read that on the original specification, but thought, no, that must be a misprunt. It isn't !!! Photo taken through accessory bag. A brilliant model. I've run it in in both directions. Superb in every respect. Thank you Hattons. Christmas present now received I'll add some more pics on my Layout topic here over the weekend: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/133643-canterbury-road-mk2-southern-railway-brs/ In an earlier post I burbled on about where these locomotives were allocated. I've attached what I've found out from various books I have. Usual disclaimers apply. P Class Locomotive allocation (2).pdf

Dock Yard Wall Inspiration and Model The inspiration for the Dock Yard wall and the Lighters has come from a variety of sources. Faversham in Kent, where I grew up, had a branch to serve the tidal creek. Apart from a short section of embedded track at the town end, the line to this has long gone, but the alignment of the trackbed can still be picked out. . The Quays and Wharves are still there. Some pictures of the railway alongside the Quays can be seen on the link here. A lot of the pictures of the Creek include Thames sailing barges. I’m not planning to model one of these for a variety of reasons, particularly size! However, the plan is to recreate a small part of a scene similar to this or this with the small lighters mentioned in the earlier post. The timber wall and uprights are my interpretation of the construction of a similar section of wall on Faversham creek. This can be seen in the two photos below. The model wall is constructed from coffee stirrers and some timber section bought in Hobbycraft. The dock ‘water’ is currently 6mm ply and the riser is 2”x1” planed. The track bed is 6mm ply as used throughout the layout. The initial construction can be seen in the photo below. The wall itself was constructed during a caravan holiday, with the coffee stirrers stuck to pre-cut sections of ply for the long and short walls, as shown below. The uprights (must be a nautical term for them) were positioned so three support the lighters. They then had the tops rounded off with a file. After returning home the ply was glued to the 2”x1” and clamped to dry. A similar section to the uprights was then glued to hide the top of the ply. This forms an edge beam similar to that shown in the first prototype photo and can be seen below. This will enable the ground cover to be built up. Water will be added to the dock in due course and the walls then be painted to match the prototype and appropriate detail added. Finally a view from water level.

Dock Yard Tour I thought I’d give you a quick tour of the Dock Yard and open up some other subjects which can be discussed another time. The Dock Yard covers all of Board 1 and overlaps onto Board 2. The yard boundary is the main line crossing over the link to the reception road/ run-round loop. The approach track runs under the main lines via what will be an arched overbridge. As shown on the earlier posts this arched bridge will take three tracks at the higher level. I did consider a steel bridge at this location. However the length of straight steelwork required to achieve this would look unrealistic relative to the main line track geometry. Therefore I now have the interesting future construction task of creating a skewed arch bridge over a curved track alignment. Two views through the future arch bridge and from above the Down Main (outer track) and one looking back towards the main lines. The Permanent Way is Peco Code 75. I feel their tandem turnout in Code 75 is much more realistic than the Code 100 equivalent. In the centre of the second picture is a cereal box cardboard mock-up (hence the chewed up window frames in the first pic) for a scratch built Ground Frame Signal Cabin. This is modelled on the Goods yard signal box at Faversham (73E). I have a plasticard version of this part built for this site. As mentioned in previous posts, this area represents an area leading to a wider off scene Dock area. The next photo shows a gated access to the wider Dock area. I’m not 100% convinced that this would be right in a prototype setting part way along a Dock. It doesn’t feel right. So that probably equals it isn’t right. That track will need to have some more thought on how it exits/ blends with the backscene. Taking the mock-up gate away would let the building to be wider on the left hand side. This would give a more realistic width for an internal platform on that track. Not very clear in the picture below, as the mock-up is only crayoned, but the second track from the right also goes into the building. The right hand track is a headshunt for the two sidings which run back towards the main line. This is deliberately just long enough for a Terrier plus a 10ft wheelbase wagon or van. This is where my P class will live. The headshunt will end with a buffer beam fixed to a concrete part of the wall. The internal platform would provide sufficient resistance to buffing loads. A rough shunt against brickwork would find a train inside the shed. To the right hand side of the building is where the scenic cassette will go, supported on a retaining wall/ blind arches. A wider view of the Dock area below Mr Wainwrights C Class No 1256 is seen running round some wagons in the short run-round loop. I have a photograph in a book of this locomotive (as 31256) by the Ground Frame Signalbox in Faversham Yard. I’ll endeavour to re-create the scene at a later date (but without the ‘face both ways’ double arm signal that existed outside the box). Finally a word of thanks to Andy York for explaining a couple of RMWeb-y things to me. Such as how to add to a post without Replying to myself (!). However, it would appear that I've not quite mastered that particular art yet John

Track Plan Part 2 The layout is split into seven boards, as shown diagrammatically below. Boards 1, 2 and 3 are different sizes on the long wall. This is to allow operating space by the Dock, which is next to the door into the room (Board 1). Board 2 spans a storage cupboard and Board 3 a bookcase. Boards 5 and 6 are equal lengths. Their width was dictated by the cut out in the room, seen in Post #1. Board 1 will have a local control panel whilst Board 4 will support the main control panel, both locations indicated red. Board 7 is the duck-under/ potential lifting section. So a quick aerial tour of the railway, courtesy of the Canterbury Road Railway Directors Bi-plane. Board 1 Dock Area. The Scenic Cassette area is shown by the orange outline. The location of a local control panel is shown in red. The unpainted lighters in the Basin are for transporting cargo from ships elsewhere in the off-scene Dock area. The mock-up of the low relief Dock Building can be seen on the left. Board 2. This picture shows the elevated main line and the connection to the Carriage Sidings and the Scenic Cassette. The main line radii in this area have been made as flat as possible. The photograph suggests the radii sharpens as it curves towards the Carriage Sidings turnout. However this must be the lens on the camera as I know it is a constant radius. Track has been loose laid in the area of the carriage sidings for temporary off tracking of stock. The main line tracks widen on upper right for the island platform. The start of the gradient down to the lower board level is shown with a red dot. The connection from the Dock Area into the reception road/ run round loop at the lower level has been loose laid. The underlay in this area indicates a very approximate alignment. The buffer stops in Yard 1 will be between the essential cup of coffee and the scale rule. Board 3. The elevated tracks split either side of the island platform site. All the tracks on the higher level are Code 100 to allow running of my older stock, as noted in Post #1. The gradient and all the lower level tracks have been or will be laid in Code 75. The Code 100 point sits on the site of the station building. The East Kent Road Car Company bus shows the location of the station forecourt. Access to the island platform from the station building will be by subway. This will also give staff access from the platform to the lower level Goods Yard. Board 4. Here the elevated tracks come back together. The island platform will have a BR(S) concrete extension where the tracks narrow to reflect the extensions built for the Kent Coast Electrification. The gradient down will continue between the controller and the elevated lines. The lower level will hold the connection between Yards 1, to the left, and Yard 2 on the right (all one yard in reality). The main control panel will be on an extension to the bottom edge of Board 4 where the temporary wiring comes through. Board 5. The elevated tracks continue round. The main to main crossover is hidden beneath the trains. Whilst it is positioned across the join between Boards 5 and 6, it will only ever be split in the event of a future move, so is essentially a permanent feature. The position of this crossover has determined the maximum radius curves that can be achieved onto boards 4 and 7. The gradient down continues next to the elevated lines. This will lie roughly where the track is on the lower level. The underlay in this area is to be cut and lifted accordingly. Yard 2 will take up the rest of the area. Board 6. The elevated tracks continue around. The bottom of the gradient down is reached in the lower right before crossing onto Board 7. The Yard 2 buffer stops will be approximately in a line between the roll of solder and the soldering iron. In the top right corner is a first attempt at a paper mock-up of the Dock Control panel for Board 1. Board 7. This is the duck under board. It has been wired to enable it to become a lift out section and creating isolating sections either side. Currently the tracks are continuous across from the adjacent boards. The white patches on all the boards show where copper clad sleepers have been positioned to enable the tracks to be cut at a future date. This ‘future proofs’ the layout to make any house move easier by (in theory) just by cutting the rails. Not all the copper clad sleepers have been soldered up, so spacing may vary under traffic……..don’t tell the passengers and staff. The inside elevated track has a turnout to the top of the gradient. The lower level tracks will split on this board into the run-round loop and reception road that continue across Board 2. This will occur to the right of the red dot. This is the approximate location for a road coming under the elevated lines and across the single track lower line with an appropriate crossing keepers cabin.

Canterbury Road Mk2 Track Plan For orientation purposes, the P shape of the layout can be seen in the photos of the railway room during its construction a few years ago. The straight side and tail of the P is on the long wall, seen in the left hand photograph below. How could I best use the space available? From my experience with CRMk1, I decided I could not afford too much space for a fiddle yard, which took up a third of the layout. However CRMk2 is too small to be able to have all my rolling stock on it at once, so some form of off tracking/ fiddling would be required. In particular the increased space on CRMk2 would allow me to run the larger locomotives I own. The tail of the “P” on the longer wall seemed to be the obvious location for fiddling/ off tracking, but the length of the tail outside the main part of the room is only 850mm long. This suggested a cassette / traverser arrangement. I also considered a through fiddle yard on the short wall as part of a continuous run. I dismissed this quite quickly because of the very sharp curves that would be required to get into a reasonable length straight fiddle yard. This, together with the area it would take out of scenic railway essentially made this option undesirable for me. To get access into the room and a continuous run means a duck under or lift out section. A lift out section is something I have not tackled before. The result of all this pondering was determined after much time spent on the floor with lining paper, straight edges, curves and coffee so that I could address the following points in my wish list: · To have a continuous double track run to ‘watch the trains go by’. · To have as much shunting potential as possible. · To use live frog points · To be at, or above, eye level when sat down. I have sketched out the resultant track plans below. It is split into three sketches. These individual sketches will develop into the control panels for the railway. I will be able to work the railway alone, or with one or maybe two other operators. The final sketch then shows how I have wrapped this track plan into the ‘P’ shape I have available. Currently I can have trains on running on the main lines shown on Sketch one without them being able to go to or from anywhere else. But this is ok, as I can sit and ponder the next thing to do whilst running in and lubricating locos that have sat in cupboards for far too long. More on the Carriage Sidings further down this post. The line to “A” appears on the second sketch. I am still thinking about the exact layout of the Goods Yard in the second sketch. The line in from “A” and off to “B”, together with the Reception road/ run round loop are pretty well tied down, either in theory or in track/ track underlay. There are a number of features (goods shed/ cattle dock/ loading dock) that I want to incorporate in Yards 1 & 2 which I have yet to finalise in plan/ detail, together with the road access. I also want to achieve a sense of prototype space and siding length without cramming in too much track. So fewer long sidings widely spaced rather than lots of short ones at close intervals. So sketch 2 just indicates the general layout. With the exception of the two sidings at the top right of sketch three, the dock area track work has been laid. This can be worked on the “one engine in steam” principle just by bringing all the wires together so shunting activities can be undertaken. This area represents one corner of a much larger ‘off scene’ dock area. The hatched area to the left of the sketch represents a (very) low relief building which the tracks run into. There is currently a cardboard mock-up of this in position to work out height/ proportion etc. I’ll add some photos in a later post showing progress to date. The tracks in sketch three will be a destination on the layout for goods/ freight to arrive/ depart from. The assumption is they will wait in this area to either go into the dock side building, or be shunted along the quayside to be unloaded ‘off scene’ inside the wider dock area. So, as if by magic, I will have empty/ reloaded wagons to take somewhere else at the next operating session. This will also be where SR Utility vans and BR(S) MLV’s will arrive (the latter under battery power) to offload cross channel parcels and post. And finally the overall concept sketch on which the layout has developed : When the track layout in the first sketch is wrapped around to form the continuous run, the crossover shown to the left of the island platform in the first sketch appears on the bottom of the final sketch. Here it performs a number of operational functions. It also becomes a crossover to the right of the platform in sketch one to give access from the inner track to the Carriage Sidings. Consequently I was able to eliminate the cost of a crossover without reducing operational potential. The double track continuous run is laid and wired. The continuous double track main line is elevated above the main board level. To minimise the footprint of this, it will be on a combination of arches/ retaining wall, rather than an embankment with slopes. This also reflects the type of urban environment, near a Cinque Port, that I am looking to create. It also achieves the “at or above eye level” objective. An island platform has been incorporated, which I’ll discuss in a later post. Inside the continuous run is a descent to the main boards. The descent takes virtually an entire circuit of the room to drop to the main board level to minimise the gradient. My vertical calculations work out at approximately 1 in 62. Again this is a first time item for me as CRMk1 was a “flat earth” railway. The lower area is devoted to the urban goods yard shown in sketch two. This is split either side of the operating area/ room, as shown. Then a connection runs off the run-round loop/ reception siding beneath the continuous circuit into the tail of the P and into the dock area in sketch three. Outside the continuous run at the higher level lie the two carriage sidings. A long headshunt will run into the tail of the P. This position of the connection from the main line to these roughly splits the long wall in half. The sketch isn’t diagrammatically correct as both the headshunt and the carriage sidings will accommodate four/ five SR coach or a SR/ BR(S) EMU combinations ie a 4 coach SR train plus a SR Utility or a BR(S) 4CEP + MLV. However, it is tight to get the points and buffer stops in and achieve the length required and retain a sense of space. The headshunt will be on a retaining wall/ blind arches behind the dock area in the tail of the ‘P’. This will form a ‘scenic cassette’. The idea is that a scenic length will stay in place for the majority of the time. When I want to swap out stock, I will lift out the scenic section and replace with a non-scenic cassette. Non-scenic cassettes will be stored on the wall above the tail of the ‘P’. This has the quadruple (!) advantages of maximising the scenic area, minimising the fiddle yard, having storage and being able to display my stock. I am in the process of working out the electrical and construction detail of the scenic cassette and how it will blend in with a retaining wall/ blind arches. I have had a detail for hidden electrical connections and aligning/ locking the cassettes in place suggested by one of my modelling friends. More on progress later. I hope you found this ramble through the railway of my mind interesting. John

Hi Graham, Please can I add my layout, Canterbury Road, to your site. Link here : http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/133643-canterbury-road-mk2-southern-railway-brs/ Thank you.

Thank you for your kind comments. I'll add some more info on Mk2 over the weekend.

Good evening RM Web-ers. I have decided to take the plunge after being a “viewer” for nearly five years and a reader of the model railway press for (very roughly) ten times longer. Hopefully, through my small contribution about my under construction layout, I will be able to give something back to others for all the inspiration I have had in the past and continue to receive. Inspiration comes from many sources: railway modelling articles, prototype railway books and RMWeb as well as from my railway modelling friends, exhibitors and demonstrators at exhibitions. Like many others I have been a modeller with the usual time, family and space constraints. This has restricted my adult modelling (so far) to only a few scratch built structures and, from about 2008, a small OO layout. That was a branch line terminus called Canterbury Road. Whilst fictitious, the layout was based on the premise that the station of the same name on the East Kent Railway had grown to be a more substantial size with the one main platform supplemented by a bay line and a very small three road goods yard, split either side of the running line. I also included an (unlikely at the prototype site) freelance scratch built engine shed blocking the exit to the fiddle yard. Until recently that layout did not have a permanent home, being erected and taken down each time I worked on or ran it, so progress was very slow. It used Code 100 track with insulfrog points. With the short locos used this created the usual stalling problems on dead sections. It was not completed and so attracts the addition of “Mk1” as it was passed to a local model railway club when we moved house. I gave it away as I couldn’t bring myself to pull it apart. I've included some photos of Canterbury Road Mk1 below. The reason for passing it on was that it was agreed with my (very tolerant) wife that the smallest bedroom of our new house could become a railway room. So Canterbury Road Mk2 has been started. The room is a “P” shape. The long (left hand side) leg of the “P” is 2900mm (9ft 6in), with the right hand, short, side being 2060mm (6ft 10in). The top and bottom of the circle on the “P” are 2160mm (7ft 1in). So the long side represents 725ft in 4mm. Or about 12 Mk1 coaches J. So you can see space is still quite limited. Remarkably I found that Canterbury Road Mk1 fitted exactly along the long wall. Canterbury Road Mk2 has slowly developed over the last three or so years from a small wish list. There has been a long period of planning and parallel ideas. Here is an extract of my initial wish list in no particular order: · To be located ‘somewhere’ in Kent · To have a continuous double track run to ‘watch the trains go by’. · To have as much shunting potential as possible (I like goods trains and understanding the transport of goods and livestock on the railway). · To use live frog points. · To enable representative railway structures and Kent architecture to be modelled (I like making buildings/ structures). · Whilst being as accurate as possible within my skill limits, to enable me to run both new and older standard OO locomotives and rolling stock (I have a proprietary collection of these including items that I was given as presents as a child. Plus I have some of the kit built models of locomotives, passenger and freight rolling stock constructed and painted by my Father). · Rail level to be at, or above, eye level when sat down. · To be completely removable if we move house in the future. the layout was therefore to be self-supporting and on easily managed boards. · To be a learning platform for the skills I want to develop and a test bed for the features I want to incorporate. So I will add to this thread my efforts to date on Canterbury Road Mk2. For the moment, though, I’ll leave you with some pictures and descriptions of Canterbury Road Mk1. Scratch built platform, Ratio signal with timber planking platform base, scratch built Bullhead rail station sign (the ‘enamel’ sign itself was bought) and proprietary fencing. The bay line was fenced off as it was intended as a Goods platform with an end loading dock accessed via the gate by the kit built station building. Scratchbuilt cattle dock with Terrier departing with two car branch train. The signal box is kit built with a fully detailed interior. The signalling plan for the layout was worked out and the levers arranged in the frame accordingly. One of the routes was set (I can’t remember which now), so some of the levers are forward in the correct order for the proposed movement. The scratch built cattle dock was made to suit the three cattle wagons in the picture. This was based on my (vague) memories of the cattle dock at Ashford that was still there in the early 1980’s, just to the west of the station. The only photograph I could find of those was an aerial one. So some of the inspiration came from the small dock at Highley on the Severn Valley. The New Romney sheep had their heads raised from looking down/ grazing to a ‘what’s going on’ position. Possibly because they are in Kent and the cattle wagons have LMS on them ? Altering sheep provides an interesting evening’s entertainment. If you like decapitating 4mm scale sheep with a razor saw, gluing their heads back on and making good with some DAS modelling clay. True-to-scale plastic surgery ? The fence posts were made from 20thou plasticard. This was initially scribed with the position of the bars to create a V shaped groove, then cut into strips. The strips were then glued together with the grooves facing each other. Then they were cut to length and the tops then filed to look like rounded concrete. They were then individually drilled through the scribe lines to accept the horizontal bars. I found this was more accurate than attempting to hand drill lots of holes dead square. The bars were made from 0.45mm black coated beading wire used for making necklaces. This can be found in sewing/ craft shops (on a shopping trip with my wife. She has got used to me saying ‘this could be used to make…….’). I intend to have a cattle dock on Mk2. So hopefully this has set the scene for some posts on Canterbury Road Mk2.

Totally brilliant modelling Adrian

Thank you for your comment PGF. I'll bear that detail in mind when choosing. Although I do like the taller tank .......decisions, decisions.

Having slept overnight, seen these responses justifying Option 3, and pondered on falling into the trap of, and current discussion in the modelling press on, expecting Option 1 'out of the box' modelling. There is (of course) Option 4 : Renumber 753 to 27. But courage required to start hacking about a brand new loco, even if it is only replacing a few numbers.......... Les1952 comment #358 noted. Looking back at his post (#135) Option 3 is definitely hard at work. From what I've been able to find out on allocation from the date of construction to scrapping/ sale of the prototypes, Hattons model of 31323 appears to have been sent/ loaned to Snowden Colliery in 1953, so a Colliery precedent is available for that particular model, if that helps Les.........? Ref Winchester. This would also appear to be an Option 3/ Option 4 livery/ number quandary. Hattons models of : A325 (SR) appears to have been allocated to Winchester in 1949 (BR) 1558 (SR) appears to have been allocated there for a short time in 1953 (BR) To settle my own problem I think pre-ordering 753 and Option 3 is definitely the starting point. Then maybe I'll pluck up courage in a few years time to pursue Option 4............

Like many on this thread I have been looking at the development of these models and deciding on which one to acquire. I am currently building a Southern based railway which will be mainly dock (track laid and dock wall in) and siding area (still plain baseboard at the moment) with a roundy-roundy main line to watch the trains go by (in progress!). My intention is that the loco's and rolling stock will start off in SE&CR and then change to Southern and then BR(S) through a running sequence, ending up with EMU's, Class 73's etc. (I'm not sure how I'll hide the third rail on a layout based in deepest, darkest, Kent whilst in SE&CR mode though......tomorrows problem). Anyway, all this is happily coinciding with the release of H classes/ Birdcages and now the P class. I've done some research on shed allocation for the P class from various publications I have. My intention/ hope was that the three SE&CR liveried locos would have spent their time round the Dover/ Folkestone area. But! These three seem to be the most travelled....... From construction to 1923, SECR No 178 was variously allocated to Reading, Battersea (Stewarts Lane), Hastings, Bexhill, Redhill, Bricklayers Arms and Orpington. In the same period the allocations for SECR 753 were : Tonbridge, Boulogne (1915), Ashford and Redhill and SECR 754: Reading and Folkstone (reference to F'stone is in January 1923, so after Grouping, but it won't have been painted on January 1st........) The only one that would fulfill a virtually full time spec of "allocation at or near Dover/ Folkestone" criteria between construction and grouping in 1923 is BR liveried 31027. This was initially allocated to Sheerness then Boulogne (1915), Dover and Folkstone. So down to Options Option 1. Dear Dave at Hattons : Chances of 31027 as 27 in SE&CR livery........please ? Option 2. ???753??? On the basis that at least Boulogne is 'near Dover' and has some Docks ??? and Ashford is close to Dover, but last time I looked it didn't have any Docks. Option 3. Bin the research, order the pretty one and apply' it's my railway' rule ???

Hi Adrian, All looking good :-). Continuing to pursue my own Faversham project and have (randomly!) come across this really clear picture of the turntable there on Page 1 of this link. Hope it helps. http://www.kenthistoryforum.co.uk/index.php?PHPSESSID=t3goqikpedhfg20fjvomib59c0&topic=6062.0 Regards John

Hi Adrian, Glad you found my post helpful. You may be interested to also know that there is an article in MRJ No25 1988 which has an article on building a Cowans Sheldon 50ft turntable and may be able to save you a few head scratchings. Although it is an article on NER (and P4) I doubt that a private company would have had significantly different models for use by different railway companies. I spent quite a while pondering building my own 50ft table with outriggers. I have attached a picture of a 4mm scale drawing I made of a 50ft table for OO for my planned model. The first picture shows the drawing and the second a Bachman C Class sitting on the drawing. JH Russels "Pictorial record of Southern Locomotives" shows a 4mm scale diagram of a C Class loco. It suggests that (allowing for minor discrepancies due to printing a scale drawing) that the overall dimensions over the outer wheels is 40ft. This suggests it will fit quite nicely on a 50ft table. The distance over buffers on the C Class diagram scales at 51' 9", which at 4mm scale suggests there would be 7mm total overlap of a 4mm scale 50ft turntable. However the model has a non-prototypical gap between locomotive and tender and consequentially a much larger overhang at either end. So the head scratching started. I set this aside for a while as some compromise is clearly required between scale diameter and model locomotives to be turned. On manufactured items: I subsequently visited an exhibition where a near perfect, unboxed and suberbly weathered peco turntable was acquired secondhand for £25. I know that was 'right place / right time' for me, but it solved many problems, including the desire to turn Mr Bullieds Pacifics, none of which were based at Faversham. My thought is I could always build a 'lift out' section with the 70ft well and have an (inaccurate) replacement 50-ish ft table for true® accuracy.

Hi Adrian, The type of turntable you have in this picture was originally planked across the full deck, which was supported by the "outriggers" you can see in your photo. This extra planking was removed in later years (presumably to allow easier access for maintenance). The railings were added on the circumference and the edge of the remaining deck, no doubt for safety reasons. I've previously seen a picture of a fully planked one at Waterloo, if I recall correctly, but can't find it on the internet this morning. There is a photo of several staff turning a loco by hand at Faversham MPD. One is using the railings to push, but doesn't appear to be trying as hard as the others. I guess they weren't designed for that. This photo also also gives a good view into the well : See part way down on link here: http://www.aslef-favershambranch.co.uk/new%20gallery.html As usual, there is a rail running around the turntable well. The deck where the locomotive sits on the rails is supported by wheels on this rail. The outriggers also had wheels at intervals to support these, as you can see on the above link and the example on link here : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stewarts_Lane_engine_shed_(34).jpg Quite a lot of them on the Southern/ former SE/ LCDR were 50ft tables. I am debating whether to create a 50ft one for my future layout of Faversham MPD, or just go with the Peco 70ft and enhance with the outriggers. The additional 20ft (80mm) sounds a lot but it does allow you to turn one of Mr Bullieds rather nice Pacific locos of which I am fortunate to own a couple (in OO I hasten to add!). But for you maybe a "Hint Hint/ good excuse" for that part of your layout that is close to main line terminii in London ;-) Hope this helps. Keep us all posted on your excellent modelling. Best Regards John