simon b

I like it in Minories format, but as a continuous run it does nothing for me. As the others have said it's so much layout for such a small scene, perhaps it needs the right side curve scenicing with a few rail served parcels warehouses. I do think the wall is too high. When I look at Barbican and compare it to the layout it seems 1/4 too high, unless its just an illusion because the board is narrow?

If you wouldn't mind posting your work I'd love to see how much space it actually takes up, seems to be a reoccurring theme that these plans take up more space than quoted.

Was it that it was just yourself operating it, and you would prefer to send trains to another operator? Or the terminus to fiddle yard layout arrangement itself?

I suppose it depends on how much bigger you go. If you've just tacked one or two extra platforms onto the basic Minories it should still be manageable for a solo operator. You are only varying which platform trains arrive and depart from, the pointwork will still only allow one simultaneous arrival and departure. But if you've now added goods lines, branch line, parcels depot, cattle pens, ect, it might be a struggle to fit those movements in between passenger trains. It's at that point you start to need another operator for the pilot loco, or the goods facilities. If I had the room to do it I'd have the station connected to a large out and back loop, but divided up into electronic sections. A train runs over a sprung switch and cuts power in that section, another train does the same behind, and you can queue several trains on that loop so it's self feeding. Let's you concentrate on the station without worrying about the fiddle yard.

I wouldn't worry about the progress to pages ratio, we've got over 135 pages in the Minories thread just talking about building it.

If you take out the complex trackwork it becomes close to this: Just to be clear I'm not knocking Buckingham, for what they had to work with back then it's a work of art. But it doesn't come across as an intensive worked commuter terminus which is what Minories set out to represent, with all the extras it has the operation moves to something else.

That was a good way to design a layout. Operate it with a few freinds, or leave the route set to act as a return loop for solo operation. The above plan is a winner as it seems perfectly doable with off the shelf track, that's where something like Buckingham falls down.

Now that I like alot. No reverse curves to worry about either.

Now that's interesting. I've never heard reference to that plan before, or the book for that matter! Will have to get a copy and have a read. The thameslink station is built between the old low level station and Ludgate hill station. If you come out of Smithfeild sidings you can still see the old low level platforms before you reach the new station. There was an interesting period when the snowhill tunnel had been reinstated for thameslink traffic, but Holborn viaduct was still in use. The old platform at Ludgate hill was demolished so the tracks could be slewed over and the junction put back in. And this pic which I forgot I had earlier.

They were too short to be used by passenger trains after electrification, so mainly used by parcel vans. I would imagine loco's would sometimes wait in them to haul the parcel trains back out, as there was no runaround at that time. They were little used and done away with after a few years.

You could argue it was in it's final years....

A great picture which I cant post for copyright reasons, but here's a link for you. https://di262mgurvkjm.cloudfront.net/e67f128b-abca-43cd-9aa6-44a89c36f633/Holborn_Viaduct_station-SM1956_ARCHIVE~2_xgaplus.jpg

It got a little simpler as time went on, but there is scope for a very interesting layout there. I did lay it out using Tilling slip points once, it worked very well as they have a more shallow curve.

Like a London to Bedford service that use's the Aylesbury link?

I was listening to a phone in on radio 4 about this, they were asking people's thoughts on Universal building their studios and theme park there. Not once was the railway mentioned, everyone was complaining about the extra traffic and the new roads that would have to be built. Even the local MP didn't mention anything about EWR going past its doors. I'll bet the Americans are planning for a station, even if our lot aren't.

The one that I'm surprised CJF never tried to imitate is Holborn Viaduct. That has alot going for it with overall roofs, 6 platforms, and a very compact track layout. Obviously he didn't have the slip points to work with that we do now, but that is the one that most screams comutter terminus to me.

It's a good exercise in track building, but if you lay that out in streamline how much space does it really take up? I seem to remember something about very sharp curves being used in part of it.

Great layout, but it's not really an urban comutter terminus.

So to update on this. I have emailed the video to the retailer and they do agree there is definitely an issue with the loco, as such they have agreed to exchange it for another. Now in fairness to them they did also forward me a video of the loco running on their code 100 test layout seemingly without issue. I think it's difficult to see the issue properly unless you put the loco on a known flat surface, checking it whilst on the track wont properly show it. I was reluctant to try to fix this myself for a few reasons, but mainly that if I break something it wont be covered under warranty. And also that I shouldn't have to! Having had a good look at it myself, I've come to the conclusion that the bogie castings are twisted on mine. The axles are a good fit in the molding's, there being no slop as such so each axle should be on the same plane as the others. But the inner axle of each bogie was sitting at an angle with only one wheel in contact with the rail, this in turn lifts the center axle away from the track. Both bogies were exactly the same, so it isnt a chassis issue. Now to be clear, I am very happy with the models. Only one of the three I have has an issue, and it is now going to be rectified. There is obviously a quality control issue with a certain batch of locos, and I'm in no doubt that some sort of solution will be offered in time. Overall it is a great looking detailed model, which captures the look of the prototype well. I never thought we would see one of these as a ready to run offering, especially for the price that it is, and I can only applaud Graham Muzz and the EFE team for bringing it to reality. Now about that 4COR........

I posted this pic in the Flickr thread, but it does show how great a Baker street based layout could look.

So after sending my derailing cc1 back to the retailer, it has returned saying they couldn't find a problem. I've made a quick video which will be emailed to them in the morning, then hopefully it gets resolved. https://youtu.be/rpxd3AkcGz4?si=xSIowVINqr9uOcgU

Could you put a trap on the siding itself? Just a single blade sort of thing?

That's plenty long enough for a loop, your only going to be running around wagons so it wont look as short. The track plan reminds me of this: Dounreay. Now get it built!

Nope, complete waste of time that stuff. I'm still mystified as to why people use it, as soon as you ballast the track it becomes solid to the board anyway.

Modern cranes are big, very big. This is on aliexpress. https://www.aliexpress.com/i/1005004101513533.html