DCB

My experience of 00 signal boxes is that with the roof on its nearly impossible to see the interior unless a) crystal clear glazing, I use old CD cases, is used and b) lighting is installed and even then you need the room lights off to see it. Of course you can take the roof off to impress your friends but that's cheating. The Quorn & Woodhouse diagram is interesting but is a preserved railway diagram for an altered track layout rather than an original from Steam Days. The NLS map shows an extra crossover to the north of the station and two crossovers to the South have been deleted. It's a good idea to have starting signals at the platform end (?) but with no points to protect I would not expect any more signals on the lower line except maybe a distant on the same post if the next signal box was within about a mile to the left. 400 yards between stop signals seems typical where they did not protect points, distant signals could be a mile or more from their signal box, and the box in advance could have its distant on the previous box's last stop signal, slotted so the distant arm can not be off when the stop signal was at stop (but not vice versa.) The thing is 400 yards is over 5 yards over 15 feet in 00 so without point work to protect it's a bit difficult to justify any more stop signals and if it is in open country the typical distance from the next station of a couple or three miles little opportunity for any more signals.

Garsdale Road, David Jenkinson (?) EDIT Not that big, not complicated but it's the one which stands out in 50 years or so reading RM and apart from being EM well within the compass of almost any modeller. Different league to Buckingham and Craig which were a lifetime's work

All good stuff but it's a few years down the road when it's been repainted and the paint does or does not flake off I have stripped old Hornby Dublo locos and regretted it, should have filled the damage and sprayed over it. Brake fluid s a good stripper but a real sod to clean off. A disgruntled Rover employee wrote "Pigs" in brake fluid on Rover SD1 door panels destined for police cars and the legend duly appeared as the paint fell off. Equally plastic can go brittle or distort

The LMS would have benefitted from a standard pool of Black 5 Jubilee and 8F boilers as it spread its overhauls around St Rollox, Derby, Crewe and Horwich. There was nothing wrong with the initial straight throatplate Jubilee boiler as the highest power output for the whole class was Rooke which had a straight throatplate boiler. Maybe what they should have done is go straight to the 2A for new boilers post war and rebuilt all the Jubilees with new boilers cascading the old ones to new build black fives, The GW No 1 boilers were not fully interchangeable as, as I understand it, the expansion brackets rivetted to the firebox differed, not sure which as Halls boilers seemed to appear on Granges and Saint boilers on Granges but not Halls on Saints. Presumably the Stars and 28XX also differed. Where the LMS would have benefitted is their belt system where locos were dragged down the workshop on a follow my leader method and fitters specialised in one small aspect of stripping or assembling so the whole relied on "In Time" supply of spares. Hence complete locos stood around waiting boilers before being brought into works. working to capacity relied on a pool of locos awaiting overhaul. The GWR craned its locos from pit to pit so any hold up only affected one loco, they had surplus pits and locos could emerge before the previous one or two or after. They also emerged fully painted ready for traffic not needing a separate paint shop. Swindon churned out repaired and new boilers, some new engines had second hand boilers I believe, but as economies were exercised in the thirties I believe the quality of repairs decreased from "as new" (From K J Cook) to something less the time on frames of older boilers would have decreased. I am not sure how many withdrawn loco boilers were recovered but there were severe loco shortage and surplus issues, often over a weekend when somewhere was dieselised, and all the stops were pulled out to keep locos going which just a few weeks later were redundant. The sad line of withdrawn 14XX when the Chalford auto train was withdrawn, and then the mad panic to get the last two 14XX from Wales to Exmouth Junction when they ran out of working DMUs. I am not at all convinced that number plate swaps did not occur to keep wheels turning, I know the preserved "Albert Hall " had a identity swap. So a loco withdrawn in times of surplus might be in better nick than one in service... And who would know....

That does not sound right, I have run battery locos in the garden and the 00 gauge Lima motors run very well on 6 X AA batteries around 7.2 volts, and too fast on the tiny 9 volt fire alarm batteries. PWM controllers are known to cause overheating as is running slowly with heavy trains. The old Triang motors used to melt the body on Halls etc when the body was very close to the motor and they overheat and fail in metal bodied locos, as do Anchoridge DS 10 etc when over loaded but none of these run hot off load, so I reckon something is pretty wrong with the class 22

The gangwayed bogie coach was an unmitigated disaster for railway economics, suddenly the tare weight per passenger just about doubled plus you had to have catering coaches more dead weight. The new coaches rapidly killed off many old "Singles" some of which lived on as parts of shunting engines and ushered in the Big engine policy spearheaded by the L&Y Atlantics. I can see the advantage of running long distance trains non stop to avoid passengers joining and leaving (possibly with other passengers belongings) en route but really it only made sense on the ECML for day trains. It wasn't until Spencer measured up the GWR Castles valve gear and persuaded Gresley to alter an A1 to long travel that non stop running to Edinburgh became possible. With Royal Scots capable of running London to Carlisle when new what the LMS needed was Colletts / Swindon's expertise in detail design which Stanier brought with new piston valve rings and axleboxes. Just the rings transformed Claughtons and Hughes Dreadnaught 4-6-0s just at a time they were being withdrawn. But Stanier was no Churchward, he missed a trick with not insisting on GWR Safety valves, so lots of badly needed steam was wasted as Ross Pop valves don't reseat when they get down to rated pressure but often drop it 10 to 20 PSI, GWR crews ran at 225 lbs psi pressure, LMS 210 on a 225 pressure boiler . All other things being equal you need lot bigger superheater for max efficiency with the lower pressure, Which the Patriot had and the Jubilee lacked hence the Jubilee's early problems. Luckily the black 5 didn't as In the 1950s they tested a Crab at Rugby, it didn't steam too well but its thermodynamic performance was excellent, better than the Black 5 which was better than the std 5.. I think the Coronations were a bit of a mistake, The trouble was when the PR department wanted a 120mph loco to compete with the LNER (and New York Central PR wise) and haul trains non stop for 400 miles when there are no trains to run non stop for 400 miles and no way to change crews , I have no doubt 6220 could have hit 120,had the LMS used the Midland through Ashchurch to Cheltemham, it was generally the fastest bit of the LMS but no some genius decided the run in to Crewe was a good idea. What Stanier did, following Churchwrds example was prove the Midlands clearance issues were largely mythical which allowed his engines over much of the Midland when the 1924 Crab design, very similar to the Stanier Mogul had been banned and had to be bodged with raised cylinders (You can see the bodgery on 13000 at the NRM (If its still there) . I suppose with the Coronation Stanier pushed and hit the limits of loco size in the UK, Exceeded the capacity of most firemen, But then again why different boilers for Jubilee, Black 5 and 8F and then keep tinkering with throatplates etc. Maybe the LMS should have just got North British Loco co to design their locos.

With the pivot below rail level what stops the rail ends colliding at the pivot end as the bridge lifts? How does the lifting end of the brick arches, the bottom of the arches clear the baseboard as it lifts. I found the Mid Cornwall lines lift flap pictures and have reproduced them below, Very impressive especially the metal hinge one , that must have taken hours to cut to shape. I see that moving the pivot back allows the deck at the rail joint end to lift vertically on a gentle arc, same as my upper bridge albeit my pivot is above rail level.

Just played with those hinges on a kitchen cabinet door and they Nothing like strong enough and they are difficult to get to "Snap" over together and difficult to get lined up. Generally its better for the rails to overhang the lifting end of the flap and the pivot to be above rail level. That way there is no projecting rails on the fixed side to get snagged in ones. Anorak and the pivot side rails on the deck move away from fixed rails It can't work with a pivot below rail level if the flap lifts up as the rail gap will disappear and rails will collide and distort.

Not my sphere of expertise but is not the middle one a BTP Back Tank Passenger with the water under the coal behind the cab Many tank locos have water tanks under the coal space, just as tenders have coal over the water tank. The GWR 7220 2-8-2T was a pretty extreme example. On the other hand GWR 57XX locos had bunkers holding 4 tons of coal where other railways locos held 1 ton Poor old Thomas the Tank's prototype (E2) only held 1 ton which made them useless for their intended passenger duties. The earliest saddle tank locos were built to get more adhesion weight over the driving wheels (Norris Lickey Banker) and the back tank avoided the problem of reduced adhesion when the water kevel got low

The most modern 0-4-4T to run in England, outside Walschaerts valve gear no less. The SMA Fitters never got the hang of Walschaerts gear, Haynes never did a workshop manual and even the blokes at Swindon GWR had never seen anything like it (Its regular turn was Swindon Junction GWR to Marlborough /Andover so it never worked properly and when it did it was a white elephant. As we know Swindon later adopted Walschaerts gear in a big way on Railmotors, , Like Festiniog railway Taliesin(?) 4 had a swivelling power bogie and I don't know of any other standard gauge single Fairlies so possibly ywas the first standard gauge twin bogie loco and BR adopted twin bogies for most locomotives so it was a real trailbreaker and in 00 it should be easy to get round 1st radius curves. I think we should all try to build one before Bachmann do an RTR version. It was scrapped but in a parallel universe it could have been sold and re used by a light railway,

The G7 is posed like LMS Royal Scots used to be so the narrow |Cab (Tender in the Scots) is not obvious. The cab bunker is several inches narrower than the tanks. LNER is central on the tank in the photo. (its the only G7 photo I know of they only lasted until 1933. I believe the M7 (BR designation) was the only "Drummind Type" 0-4-4T with a "Full width Cab" Drummond built narrow cab 4-4-0s as well before changing to full width cabs during the T 9 production run. The NB had progressed to 4-4-2Ts by the time they went to full width cabs.

Due to failing memory I find I have not 5 red B set coaches but 7 so my "2nd" set is in fact my 3rd. Final acquisition made 3 pairs after I fitted white metal vents to replace the missing ones. However I forgot the usual "Ugleigh" branch B set has H/D type Peco couplings all round and shortened H/D Peco couplings between the pair with buffers removed I understand they either had no buffrer at the inner ends or proper buffers all round not shrunken dwarf Airfix type. Anyway I took an unflattering warts and all photo showing standard and close coupled versions together... I never realised the close coupled set has the interior painted two different colours!

Triang had a close coupling position for their Bob class in around 1960 which works down to 3rd radius. Scale distance 3mm ish works down to 1st radius (pulling and light engine not propelling) ) on most locos except when the drawbar is incredibly badly designed as per the W1, It should pivot near the rear coupled axle where the pony truck would pivot it had one like any normal person would provide in 00. IIt seems to me the long coupling is to allow the Tender wiring to articulate until the warranty period has run out. Personally I bin tender wiring but some people with dead point blades need it,

I did a bit of filing to the chassis today filing the back lugs away and a notch at the front with the silver weight removed in addition to filing away the footsteps on the K's body today and the body fits the Triang derived chassis a lot better than it ever did the Hornby. Even works with scale (H/D) buffer heights Needs dummy boiler where the tank cut away lets light through Plan A to flog it quick is slowly being set aside, I see yet another out of period out of region item for my spare stock shelf. But which number ? Pre 1946,LNER post 1946 NE BR(?) I

More pics. Upper level Bridge sides longer than track so track lifts more nearly vertically Wiring passes along axis of hinges Lift section lifting hinge against wall in coal depot soon to be monumental mason. Lift section down showing rather battered wooden Barrow crossing trying to disguise gap Hinge in foreground

I think North Star pre dated Stephenson's link motion by a good few years, Stephensons link motion compares to Wachaerts like a DOHC V V C petrol engine to conventional DOHC The V V C is better unless you have to maintain or pay for it.... Collett came from an engineering not a Railway background, he transformed GWR locos from a Ford like quality,rough and ready to almost Toyota standards of precision. Optical lining up of cylinders, axleboxes etc and precision grinding of hornguides gave substantial increases in mileage before locos got "Rough" allowing servicing at 75 000 miles intervals instead of when the locos finally packed up. Collett at the LMS? Too old I believe he was 60 in 1930. The LMS wanted an outsider neither Crewe nor that other place near Nottingham which no GWR supporter ever mentions. NB Loco co had designed some darned good locos for the LMS (and LNER Sandringhams|) Stanier was probably pretty frustrated, Gresley was friends with Stanier and knew the rep of the LNER would be shattered if either of his side kicks Bullied or Thompson got the LMS job so chances are he would have encouraged Stanier to take the job. Which meant that the LMS got an outsider and 2000 odd pretty much standardised locos and decent valve rings and axleboxes when Stanier found how bad the LMS ones were compared to GW ones in terms of wear.. I think Stanier was a great visionary, he followed Colletts scrap and build philosophy, started with 57XX then 14XX etc tanks and turned over Crewe from a repair centre for LNWR designs to essentially a new build facility for Stanier designs. Sadly many find LNWR locos were scrapped and Mudland antiques were left to creak, clank and groan around the system far longer than they should . You wonder what might have happened if someone from NB Loco co had got the job, 3 cyl pacifics ? Or Thompson, his masterpiece was the B12/3 which many preferred to B17s, or Bullied I have a horrible feeling there would have been 50 partly completed Leaders lined up outside Crewe works when he was sacked rather than the 4at Eastleigh(?) !

Au Contraire, they also say "You will obey"

I always thought the Triang M7 was more like an NB 4-4-2T than anything 0-4-4T found north of the Watford Gap. The Scots liked narrow cabs on their 0-4-4t s wi the Westiin hoose pomp reet by the cob so they cuild gi et a clout wia hommer whon et packed in, Worst thing about the Triang M7 is it was designed for Magnadhesion to hold the front wheels down. Without it the bogie takes a big chunk of weight and the unloaded leading wheels don't pick up very well. On mine I made a split axle pick up bogie with Bachmann wagon wheels in a pair of brass frames with insulated spacers wired to the motor and chassis It still won't pull the skin of a cold coffee but it does not stall and all the wheels go round, There aren't many RTR locos with wiper contact unpowered pick up axles ypu can say that about....

The Lima bogies have a large tower which acts as pivot and bears on the flat underside of the underframe, the cut out conversion allows the Lima bogies to take larger wheels without increasing ride height. The tower has a flat top but is hollow which ,makes shortening it very difficult, Most other makers bogies lack the tower and need spacing washers to raise the ride height to match the original ride height, At least one of my Lima Mk1s runs on Hornby bogies. On the other hand Lima wheels stay on the track a lot better than Hornby and I use Lima wheels in Hornby Dublo bogies. The silver Lima wheels are pretty bad but can be improved by infilling the recess under the tyre with filler and spraying with black paint. I find a quick easy upgrade is to shorten (Retract) the buffers between coaches and move the couplings in to close up the spacing so the corridor connections just clear, On the full size the corridor connections touch but the buffer heads never get closer than several inches. Pics are Airfix Siphon G or H Bogies and a Lima from a Mk 2 I believe, I couldn't find a spare mk1

A couple of basic points. When designing a shunting layout you need to work out which locomotives you will use. The old branch lines were often unable to cope with the length of six axle diesels, or 2-6-0 tender locos and there was not enough length beyond run round points for the points to be changed, so they could not run round hence keep the length down to have the buffers against the end of the layout. If you enjoy shunting, then shunt. My top doodle is four sidings. Full size railways shunted wagons into station and destination order, Coal empties into colliery order pre WW2 that would often be wagons with different colliery names on, vacuum brake wagons would be shunted to the front of a fast goods for extra brake power, or separated into fast brake fitted and slow non brake fitted trains. Some yards served only traffic in one direction. Stations often had vehicles shunted to specific platforms or sidings even areas of sidings, but incoming wagons come in first before the outgoing so a station or yard could become clogged, Brake Vans roamed like locomotives, on rosters, often a rural branch had one brake van which was on every train, they seldom got left with the other wagons... Scale length wagons help with space, most 00 coal wagons are on 10ft wheelbase instead of 9ft, that makes quite a difference 1 wagon every 2 feet... None of the plans work without a separate board for a headshunt. A long headshunt and only two sidings can be interesting shunting, my branch terminus "Ugleigh" takes about 20 minutes to shunt especially if the loco doesn't have the power to shift both incoming and out going wagons

I think there is scope for 5 areas of independent operation. Four locos /operators running / shunting simultaneously I would arrange for all controllers to be able to access all areas, maybe like me you have an expensive controller with wander lead and some old stuff without, makes sense to use the good one most of the time. My terminus is wired with 6 sections fed from 3 sources and each SECTION (Not Controller) has a multi pole rotary switch with red /green /Black/White black being off. An "OFF" position is very useful, my main station does not have one. Common return on a simple layout does simplify wiring and allow single pole switches but I would not use common again on anything complicated. I have no problems using fishplates for connection indoors but limit sections to five pairs of fishplates , that's six yards from the feed or 11 yards 33 feet 30 metres of plain track or maybe 5 points like 2 metres when feeding from the toe, its the number of fishplates which is critical My Terminus panel is a row of six 4way rotary switch knobs poking through the baseboard framing with the switches behind on a sub panel which pull out when the knobs ae removed. Main station rotaries poked through Hardboard. and the controllers are spread around the room. 4 of them can each operate over 90% of the layout so you can run a loco from just about anywhere to just about anywhere on any one of 4 controllers (The one with the wander lead usually) see doodle black arrows feeds

Another vote for code 100. 3ft radius is a good minimum which rules out double slips (2ft) as points and curved points (2ft 6") However double slips are more reliable than long crossings when used as crossings and easier to wire as live frog. A lot of locos (Bachmann 2-8-0s in particular "turn the corner A lot depends on the circuit breaker "DCC" usually implies around 4 amps, "DC" about 1 amp. Design amperage is 1 amp. So what is bullet proof on DC is woefully inadequate on DCC You can use 1 amp breakers on DCC and power areas and avoid the issues. or like myself use 2 amps DC and get all the DCC fishplate and point blade failures without DCC. If there is access surface mount point motors, make sense, I prefer under baseboard motors driving through bell cranks and omega loops. Many of my Peco live frog code 100 points used straight out of the box just work and keep working and have had no maintenance in 35 years, one or two suffered point blades coming loose but just one or two, I have never changed a fish plate in the FY but they live in the dark under a station, so don't get UV light or the oxidisation the ones in sunlight get and the ones outside need fishplates changing about every two years droppers to every bit of rail and all the DCC faddle while being DC, Lots of solutions to lots of problems,j ust identify the problem before parting wi cash.

Not at all hard to wire up. One feed to anywhere along the top rail and one to the bottom with insulated fishplates everywhere. Feed from the bus on DCC but through a change over switch on DC if more than one controller can power it. In many ways it is an easy and more reliable alternative to a long crossing,they only get complicated if they are live frog ones.

Southern Region is a broad church. The three constituent railways retained much of their individual character until electrification or dieselisation. It's also not the Great Western. Most SR layouts are operated like GWR lines with "equivalent" SR locos. I am pretty confident there were no electric point motors on the SR west of Exeter and probably none west of Salisbury, until well after the end of steam. There just were not any significant signalling and point operation upgrades after around 1900 , just some extra sidings in WW2

OMG I suppose it could be a collectors item.. I suppose I had better put it on eBay, when I find some tension lock couplings, Unless anyone on here wants it for the cost of postage.