DCB

Hi I am pretty sure that if you attach the feed wires to the long curved rails each side of a dead frog Double Slip then it all works. (People talk about feeding the toe end of a point while I feed the two outermost rails which is the same thing but works for diamonds and Double slips which don't have a toe as such) Chimer, yes I envisage running an anti clockwise train from marshalling sidings to "Green" Goods line while holding a train on the main (Between B and A on my variation of your plan) hence the need for my separate Red and Orange sections. But then again I have put in sections I have never used and regretted not putting in extra sections, its not an exact science just balancing flexibility against complexity.

My suggestions are for DC with Dead Frog points If I had known Chimer was doing a schematic diagram I would never have done my colouring in act as there is really little difference between them. However there is a flaw in Chimers diagram in that trains cannot get from the Marshalling sidings to the main line clockwise as there is no feed to the lower left road out of the double slip? The feed needs to be on the slip to feed both forward and backwards. The whole of the Green trackwork could be fed from here. My suggestion just gives more flexibility. You can isolate a train in what I colour Orange in Chimers suggestion by setting points A and B against it but you cannot isolate the train on the Red while you bring the train from Orange to Green with Chimers suggestion. you can also use the Marshalling sidings as a passing loop for the main line The problem with shunting while running a roundy roundy train is swapping them over. I would suggest double rail breaks, I put mine two feet from any point on a main line which might be set against a train to provide a fail safe, but it is your choice. Incidentally I always recommend an off position for selector switches, either a centre off DPDT or a spare segment on a rotary as isolating one train while another runs is essential in my experience. I agree running with the room lights off id theraputic, I have and Airfix 2-6-2T with a single headlight and firebox glow which is battered and too rough for daylight use and Triang "B" set of two Brake composites with track powered LEDs in each compartment which likewise are pretty ugly but they look great running on a darkened layout, also I have a Toad brakevan with track powered tail light and interior glow and two Full brakes with battery tail lights, and passing my one coloured light signal and LED lit signal box imparts a sense f realism entirely at odds with the scenery (or lack thereof)

I am no expert on the Midland but Rowsley was where rampant Midlandism strangled the life out of what should still be a main line. To elaborate to the Midland as far as freight was concerned there was a Derby Rowsley line and a Rowsley Peak forest line. From Derby mighty goods trains toiled north until at Rowsley they were slimmed down to a size which a pair of 4F 0-6-0s, one in front one behind could cope with up the slight slope to Peak Forest. Even if a 7F 8F or 9F was the train engine the load still had to be within a 4Fs capability to ensure the banker could hold the train if a coupling broke. So the Rowsley sidings were busy with Jintys remarshalling north bound freights into 4F sized chunks, while 4Fs acted as bankers. Jintys would have to have banked in pairs due to a lack of brake power, a 3F Tender loco may have been able to substitute. So the likelihood is Rowsley Jinties would have done little else but shunt the marshalling yards. The Midland had vast quantities antiquated large wheeled tender locos for light passenger work, some of them brad new, some from the 1880s so I doubt they would have needed a Jinty for such work.

I make it 8 feeds required for reasonable flexibility or 7 if you lose that kickback at the terminus, that is if you use insulfrog points as you say you intend to. Pics attached I would use cab control with rotary switches for each section fed by up to three controllers. I would use four way rotaries so as to have an "Off" position, and have every controller able to control any section That is basically how I wire layouts. Alternatively the orange could be switched between green and red with an off position but that would not save much complication. I know you have a twin controller but I think you sholud plan for three if not 4. Walkrounds are good, especially Morley and OnTrack with easy disconnect DIN plugs in case you get one wrapped round your foot. With this a train can shunt the branch terminus with a branch train on the branch, maybe waiting for the junction to clear, either main or goods line trains can shunt the marshalling sidings, and a train can depart the marshelling sidings, go round goods and main lines and up to the terrminus all on one controller. A mainline train can also wait on the yellow section while a marshelling sidings to branch train runs through the red section . Working signals are good for this sort of stunt. The orange section could be lengthened towards the green and the green section could be shortened if you wanted to shunt the marshelling sidings and green sidings at the same time, (If you have friends round?) I much prefer to have a long section of branch available as a headshunt rather than have a short separate headshunt as I find these kick back sidings a darned nuisance. My ideal terminus has a loop and two sidings and only four points.,

There is no real imperative to insulate between insulfrog points forming crossovers, or to have isolated sections for parking locos. What you may need isolated sections for is fault finding and stopping one train while another runs onto the same loop as in swapping trains over. It may be that your M.O involves simply running trains around the loops and storing other trains in sidings. You are committed to insulfrog points, with modern all wheel pickup locos that should not be a problem, and you have a controller which I assume is DC. There are various method of operating points, the "Overscale Thumb" being my chosen method for visible sidings and diode matrix Capacitor operation where they can't be seen. Wire in tube can be cheap and very realistic, slow motion motors are expensive and not as realistic when representing signalman operated steam age points, H and M point motors are incredibly reliable... They all work it is just a matter of choosing what suits you. The Titanic is a bigger problem. A disaster narrowly created by the actions of a lookout who saw the iceberg and a helmsman who swung the ship to one side instead of ringing for "Full Astern" and ramming the berg. Had they hit head on the ship would almost certainly have suffered massive damage to the bow but not have had hundreds of feet of plating caved in along the side and would very likely have either survived or sunk like a stone. Again had the cracked on at full speed the berg would not have been across their course when the passed it. Whether re arranging the deckchairs is relevant I have no idea. How did Titanic deck chairs get into a railway thread anyway?

There is an easy test. lay a circle of 1st or 2nd radius track, connect the transformer, put the loco on the track, give it full power. If it stays on the track its a later one, if it flies across the room its an early one. Some have non see through wheels and are essentially useless as the tyres quickly come loose

Looks good Some form of blinds or shutters would be good, keep out prying eyes and strong sunlight which fades paintwork and printed signs. Also our track by the frosted glass window seems to get dirty far more quickly than the rest of the layout.

NRM and the Preservation movement ought to give consideration to suitable locomotives for future mainline running. A trick has been missed here, a replica A3 should have been built at less than the cost of the Flying Scotsman rebuild with A4 boiler Cylinders internal streamlining etc for running and the "Old" one kept as a static exhibit like Livingstone Thompson of the FR, built out of scrap components. The replica could even have had a season in Blue Livery as "Gordon the Big Engine" But A3s are heavy brutes, Big and wide and high. As is Tornado and we all know what happened to the mechanically almost identical "Blue Peter." What is needed is something sure footed, speedy 75 mph min and yet with no gauging problems. Add in Famous and Charismatic and different and you have Caledonian 903 "Cardean" ideally in superheated form. A smooth running Inside cylinder 4-6-0, under 20 t axle loading, regularly timed at 80mph in service, 5000 gallon tender very low cab and boiler mountings to Caley loading gauge probably the most famous loco of its day. A real Scottish Icon. A replica should be able to haul a good load under most weather conditions and would certainly be more distinctive than yet another big Black/ Green/ Red Pacific and should be cheaper to build and run. It could even spend some spare time shuttling between Aviemore and Grantown on Spey qlong with 828 when the Srrathspey railway is extended. Just a thought. (Oh and the Scottish Parliament might chip in a bob or two)

I always had the impression that the cowls rusted out and were cut away because they didn't actually do anything, I always thought they looked better without them. My over riding impression of the 47s was that there were no two alike by the late 1980s, headcode boxes or not Aerial bracing brackets, cowls, tanks, liveries, Red Stripe, ScotRai Blue stripe (47/7) Grey, Blue Large Logo Blue. However like almost all diesels in 00 the axle boxes need to move over uneven track, It is like having the valve gear frozen on a steam loco when it is all a plastic or cast lump. Also the radiator shutters need to move. It was so noticeable that on 47s leaving Cheltenham Spa for the north after the demise of the Peaks that the radiator shutters closed when they stopped and opened again as the diesel engine accelerated even before the loco started to move,

A couple of things. To get maximum clearance put a thin ply or mdf sheet on the bottom of the top baseboard, it stops wires dangling. There is no need for all the strength members to be below the track. We usually have a lip to keep train from falling off so why not make it a structural part. I slotted some 2X1 to take MDF as per my drawing and even slotted the 1" edges of one to give a board only 1" thick but very light and strong as only 30" long over my duck under. Another minimum depth trick is running wires on the surface is quite prototypical if you disguise them as point rodding and operating points with piano wire from a surface mounted disguised or hidden point motor is another way to save depth. You need a lift out or lifting section. These can be a total pain in the rear. However I made a lifting section three or four years ago in the form of a double track bridge deck which works very well like under 10 seconds to lift or replace using car bonnet hinges from a Ford Escort I think. It works very well because the hinge is very narrow but the load goes through the side members of the baseboard and lift deck not through the end or surface. It lines up with a tapered bolt at the "Landing end" The trick is to make sure the landing end goes down absolutely square on a very solid surface, using car hinges you can adjust the pivot to get this spot on before you even lay the baseboard surface. Hiding the hinge is a challenge which ever way you go but mine hide in bridge abutments and just leave a slot visible when fully down.

It does not look like much fun to operate or have much scope for scenic treatment. I thought Mike Oxon's version was better. As a reference I have an awful lot more crammed into my still incomplete "Bed Layout" which at 76" by 54" sits on a double bed. It had troubled with the spiral but I think I can rebuild it with a modern spiral and actually make it work. Please see drawing attached, drawn from the layout so not to scale Min Radius is 15" and mainly set track points. I drew it on top of your layout plan to give me a scale and your plan shows through in places.

The S bend in the main line looks a bit odd and shunting many of the sidings blocks the main line, why not move the sidings forward 3" straighten the main line put the branch junction further back and make the inner line into a goods loop. See drawing of sidings half.

It still scales at 11 ft 8 " X 8ft if those are 6 inch squares...

I use set track and code 100 streamline interchangeably. Under 2 ft radius I cut the webs on set track curves and ease them out to 24" radius as they seem to keep their shape and don't kink like streamline. Equally set track straights are straight unlike streamilne which is difficult to lay straight, so mix and match, Set track points are best avoided in my view as their minimum radius is only about 15" Streamline small raduis points are more like 18" minimum 2ft nominal. If you are into "Shunting" then a couple of things to bear in mind are that pushing long rakes of Tension Lock coupling wagons around sharp curves and reverse curves is difficult. In my experience anything less than 3rd radius and 2ft radius points causes problems and even then with more than around 12 wagons one coupling will ride over another leading to a derailment. More important is why shunting was done, basically it was to get the right wagon onto the right train and to keep the train length and weight within line limits. Often a pick up goods, one stopping at most local goods yards along its route would have the wagons arranged in station order, whereas a through goods would most likely have vacuum braked wagons next to the engine. In BR days this was obvious from the Bauxite coloured vacuum fitted wagons and the grey not vacuum fitted wagons. Pre WW2 many private owner wagons, principally coal, ran between collieries and coal merchants, These had to be returned to their owners leading to much unnecessary shunting when all the wagons were "Pooled" early in the war. After 1940 ish any PO wagon could appear almost anywhere within its home area, getting grubbier and grubbier until finally it was repainted grey or scrapped. Wagons were still despatched from colliery to merchant, different grades of coal to different customers so shunting and sorting continued though rather more anonymously with the loss of the distinctive liveries. A pick up goods could be 80 wagons long and the Southern was fond of hanging 60 wagons behind a small 4-4-0 on the withered arm and the GW not averse to using a 28XX 2-8-0 on a pick up goods. Often a wagon might travel in three or more trains from start to end of the journey. Simply shunting a long goods into the right sidings at a terminus can be fun with the right couplings (Kadee?) but I like a nice long headshunt or using the mainline so I can move 15 or 20 wagons at a time. Marshalling sidings are where trains are sorted into the right order. The tracks will be as close as double bmain line or closer. Nearholmer's drawing gives a good indication of typical marshalling or sorting sidings. The GWR had some asymmetric goods flows and one way yards, Moreton Cutting near Didcot was originally for sorting London bound trains only with 2 groups of around 6 sidings each and two arrival roads. Goods as in unloading sidings have space for vehicles to get alongside wagons or unloading platforms, set track spacing is not bad for this as the spacing was for horse drawn carts originally and they can turn much more sharply than lorries. I have a uncompleted loft layout 13' X 9' approx where the fiddle yard is to be scenic as a set of marshalling sidings and adjacent MPD and the hidden storage loops only hold complete trains. However back to my original post, I don't think you have anything like enough room for your original plan in 9 X 7. see attached.

I had problems with my spiral in that the deck sections were reluctant to twist and they were 6mm MDF not steel. The cross section of a spiral has to be horizontal all the way up, left its own devices it will take up an increasingly steep angle as it rises hence the need for twist.

Er, I just can't see how you are going to get all this into 8'8" X 6'8" in 00, Sorry. Even in N it would be a squeeze. Usual suggestion is the 60 plans for small layouts / Track Plans by C.J.Freezer or "plan of the month in 1970s back numbers of Railway Modeller. I think you should be looking to run 5 coach trains as a minimum if you don't want fairly large LMS locos to look a bit silly so I would suggest a much simpler scheme with bigger radius curves and especially larger radius points if you want that railway like feel. A continuous run is good, It is always useful for running in and I like simply watching trains and locos run as ai fiddle about on my work bench. My old layout had the track at 62" so the duck under was no problem. Lift outs can be a pain but I have a lifting bridge which works one handed and lifts up and down in seconds and indexes quite nicely. I prefer drawing on paper to CAD as you can plan where each train move will be, but check out the Freezer Plans as a first step.

Anyone converted one to a G6 yet?

I think you would end up with a kink where the flexi joined if you trimmed back to the frog and used flexi track. In any case I would use set track rail not flexi. My indoors layout has steel track and I do like using steel set track for tight curves and for straights which need to be straight because the rail seems to be more rigid and less flexible and less prone to straightening itself out and kinking. I assume modern Nickel Silver code 100 set track rail is less flexible than flexi track rail but I admit I have not tested this.

That size comparison is interesting, No wonder the Yeovil crews preferred the M7, coaling the 02's tiny bunker must have been a pain for a start! It seems to me almost all the complaints are re the driving wheels, quartering and too wide to gauge. As it the fixing looks similar to the old troublesome Mainline wheel fixing has anyone had the wheels come loose after correcting the back to back or quartering?

You could try something like this which would let 2 trains circulate or one do a figure of 8 while another shunted if it is DCC

What is your gradient and which Push Pull set? You may be able to lighten the coaches as I did with some Hornby Hawkesworths and brass pinpoint cups run a lot freer than steel pin points in plastic. For me the absence of a crew spoils the realism of the pic

Bit more global warming and she will be able to take a short cut through the Arctic ocean.

Personally I would just put a lot of set track curves straights and points on an 8X4 board and let them play. I should have done that with my son when he was young but instead I started a three level 76" X 54" layout on the spare bed which has never been finished. It did however feature double track and a spiral and 19" and 21" curves opened out from 2nd Radius, see pic. We did however have great fun with a double track plus loop plus turntable 5'X3' approx layout on the living room table. If you must use the planned configuration why not squeeze down the top trackwork and extend the bottom to allow a second platform as per my messy alteration to your drawing.

Has anyone else noticed the quartering looks to be quite a long way out on this loco?. The rods are not horizontal. Maybe I'm paranoid having spent hours trying to get mine level on a Bulldog. I have just realised I have never seen a picture of an 02 with cab doors shut, how easy is it to cut the door opening out? Has anyone succeeded without destroying the handrails. I

If you pack the bogie spring or increase the tension you will put more weight on the bogie and less on the rear drivers. It will help to keep the front down but is not going to help the adhesion much, though having slightly less weight on two axles is better than slightly more on one axle However it will help keep the leading drivers on the rails on curves. I think production tolerances are at fault to a certain extent but it is a design concept decision to have a rigid frame. Personally I think it sounds like a new chassis is the only way to get acceptable haulage, the leading wheels and bogie pivot should be on a rigid frame and the trailing drivers in a heavy sub frame carrying the motor pivoted around the front axle. Thats what I have planned for my M7 and 14XX which have similar problems,