simon b

If you want to save a bit more space the east side crossovers could be replaced by a single slip and a pair of large points, that gives you a scissors formation on a curve. All depends on what radius curves your happy with.

I'm going to suggest the same and say the bay platform would be better on the outside of the layout, filling up one the corners. Put the whole station on a slight curve too and your operating well gets alot bigger.

I've not had a chance to run mine yet, probably won't for a while but I did notice when looking at the model the wheel sets have alot more side to side play than I was expecting. I wonder if this allows the bogie to crab in certain track formations, possibly "picking" the frog. I think shimming the outer axles of each bogie would help keep things in line, don't shim the centre axles though. The acura 37 has the opposite problem, not enough play in the centre axles to cope with uneven joints.

If it goes through the other points without issue, the question is what is different about that one?

Just received my model of cc1 in blue, very impressive looking machine. Looking forward to staging a few pics with the 71's. But the real question is when do we get the NSE and jaffa cake versions? 😂

I didn't know it existed, but I was watching "Diesels and electrics on 35mm" and it was shown as a preview for another dvd at the end.

The freight plan works well, I could see it as a large parcels depot. Sticking with passenger operation for now though. I'm thinking of using a three way point to save space, then a medium for the kickback ssiding. It has to fit on a 52" board as that's the width of the back seat of my car.

DPD is my go to courier, never had an issue with them. I used to think evri was bad untill I had some dealings with parcel force....

That sounds an interesting variation, any pics of your layout?

Hi all. In a thread recently Victoria Park was suggested to me as a good basis for a micro layout, I decided to take another look at it and it does seem to tick all the boxes. Just wondering how many of you have used this plan, and what are your thoughts when operating it? This is the original: And a version with three platforms which is probably what i would do:

Anyone here had an order update from Rails of Sheffield? Got a blue one on pre-order but haven't heard anything more.

Thanks, now that is interesting. I had a bright red colored version of that building, but with a set of doors in the center. I've never seen the version without, and never would have guessed that's what it was used for! I still have the clock tower somewhere.

Hi all, Happy new year! I've always liked the look of the old Triang station buildings, they remind me of the 1960's brutalism style. I've still got a few of these and was wondering if they were actually based of anything on the real railway?

I'm hoping for cc2 in green with full yellow ends, late 60's style.

Great idea for a layout, any more pics?

Looking good so far, are you going for 3 platform face's or something smaller?

Just stumbled across this topic, I think you should be proud of what you've created there. You've done a fantastic job at capturing the atmosphere of an urban scene, and that's the part that matters. The pics of trains appearing from the gloom under the station are my favourite. Is that a modified "Dunster station" on the bridge? Following with interest.

I know it says 5 or 6 vehicles, but would that be long enough? It shouldn't be to hard to reform them to 6 cars before they start in service, but how many seats would be lost compared to the present mk3 formations?

I would imagine they will be reformed into 7 or 8 car sets, some with a driving trailer at both ends.

If the mk5 sets do go to chiltern the locos will move with them, there are quite a few electrical differences between these and Chiltern's existing locos. Door controls and an onboard train monitoring systems come to mind. The 175's don't have the correct form of tpws for the Chiltern line, so that would need to be addressed before they could be used. Then there is the issue of the lack of seating compared to another unit, and they won't multi up to a 165/168. I also heard a rumour that the 175's have already been signed to another company.

Beacon rail have an exhaust silencer mod that reduces the noise, it's the ETS supply requirement that makes most of the racket so there are ways around it. Given the time frame involved I can't see it being anything other than the mk5 sets.

So Chiltern have a tender out for replacement of the mk3's, the way it reads I'd say that is definitely where the mk5 sets are headed to. https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2023/W51/813170912

Thanks for the info gentlemen. I've just spent alot longer than expected on the leighton logs website, quite the rabbit hole that site is. So the 21, 26 and 28 went north early on so I'll rule those out, if I pick 1966 as the year that seems to give the most varied choice of locos to use. Class 24, 25, 27, 31, and with a bit of modelers license class 23. On the dmu side 1966 gives me 105's, but the 116 came later so those are ruled out. Perhaps a 125 at a push. Have I got that about right?

Thanks for the replies, that's quite a list of locos to choose from. The 127 dmu's is an interesting one, in theory they could have reached Moorgate but I've never seen evidence that they did. I wonder if they were found to not be powerful enough for the gradients on the line? I assume that is why the 116's were used with 3 power cars? Were the 26's used as well as the 27's? The class 101 is also a new one to me, were any of those tripcock fitted? Cheers.