Derekstuart

This is very true. My local siding masquerading as a heritage railway is really busy on summer weekends, even though more time is spent running around each end of the siding than actually moving. But they've hit on an entertainment and leisure combination (there's a pub next door and a river walk which, prior to our forced imprisonment, was a good day out in itself.) Is it about education though? I don't think I learn anything about it when I last travelled on the NYMR (except that an A4, Sir Nigel Gresley no less, runs at only 40MPH on branch line trains in the middle of nowhere). I went because it reminds me of my youth. I suspect most people, including families, go there for that reason. Even those not old enough to remember it, still like to think of 'the good old days' and nothing symbolises Britain's past better than a steam railway. Except perhaps a Military/ war museum.

You'll probably get more enthusiasm and response when this C19 lark is over. I don't think many people have plans for anything at the moment. I think this has got to be the first Chinese layout I've seen before. I'll keep a look out for it on the exhibition circuit.

Thanks @Edwin_m and @Bomag I thought there were more 86s upgraded than that- thanks for the correction. I've been in the cab of an 86 doing over 100, so I assumed all the 86/2 had been so treated. Speaking of the wires from Carstairs- I don't suppose you remember exactly where they stopped before through wiring, do you? I seem to recall it being near the first left bend by the old Mid Calder Junction- but whether on it, before it, after it, I cannot recall. Thanks again.

@hexagon789 thanks for the explanation. Tell me, was there a particular reason why Glasgow used to get the 87s and Edinburgh 86s? As I understand it the 86 was upgraded to 110MPH and so should have been interchangeable with the 87, but the 'rule' seemed to be applied with almost religious devotion. Until the twilight year or two of locomotive operation on WCML, I'd never seen an 86 with MK3s. Likewise I don't think I ever saw an 87 go to Edinburgh. (though quite frankly I don't think ANY AC should have gone to Edinburgh- I really rather miss the run out from Carstairs with a Brush 4.)

To those complaining, there's nothing to stop you setting up a crowd-funded option for a 89. As I understand it, Rails will have to commit £100,000 to this project and probably not see that money back for 12-18 months. That's a big commitment and one that needs to be very carefully weighed up. Would anyone still feel so happy to risk that amount with their own money? What's that I see? All those raised hands coming back down again. I might be in the minority here, but I think Rails WILL produce the 89. Maybe not at the moment, but at some point in the not too distant future. Why? Because it's consistently been one of the most requested models for many years and it will sell in numbers. (No, I have no inside information, just an opinion.)

There is a story I read- can't recall where or even whether it was proven or just an urban myth- where a newly qualified Guard was in the 'leading' BG of a train being reversed into Euston and, as instructed, when he neared the stop blocks he applied the brake- only he applied the park brake and not the air brake valve, resulting in an impact. Again, I do not warrant this story. I have rarely seen trains propelled into Euston in this manner (normally being dragged in by the incoming loco, even if it was just the Willsden 'Shunter' 81).

Mark, that's really impressive. Although the track layout is different, this is really reminiscent of a place in Edinburgh, though I am damned if I can remember where. It had a chip shop on the corner, with the railway up on the embankment. Based on the stock that went past it might well have been the Edinburgh- Carstairs line. Instantly recognisable- even without the AN68 Atlanteans (I can still recall their growling engines and the 'peep' of the fast-changing (for the era) pneumocylic gearboxes.) Followed.

Yes, the scaffolding was built late 1960s, but beeching moved on and marples fled before we could use it.

.

If I may add that it's important to check BOTH ends in the photo and not just make an assumption. Muggins here, on his first 'proper' rebuild/ repaint looked at both ends of a loco, but from 10 years apart- the particular combination of ends I used never existed on that loco in reality at the same time. BTW I know there was some equipment fitted at one end, but what exactly was it and why was it relevant to one-man operation, please? regards.

EDIT: Deleted. I knew as soon as I pressed enter that I'd regret it.

Emitting nitrogen into the air? Good lord, we can't have any more of that since it's already something like 78% nitrogen already... Ironically, if it wasn't for the nitrogen, any flame on planet Earth would ignite the entire atmosphere.

Pete, do you happen to know whether Southern Pride still do the 310? The reference to 'made to order' has been crossed out and as I can't see them keeping the etches in stock, I am wondering if that's been discontinued- whether temporary due to this National curtailment of freedom or whether permanent. I did email to ask, but got no reply.

That's interesting, thankyou. It was my original perception that this also affected the inner rail too, but I was persuaded that this was my imagination and only affected the outer rail. My biggest experience of tight curves is the Esk Valley, having walked much of it over the course of a summer (as a guest of an official British Rail working group).

Hello Paul thanks for your clarification. If I may suggest it was a little ambiguous as to whether you meant *just* the keys immediately either side of the fishplate. As for what extent people go to, that's entirely up to them as I wrote above. Hello John I'm probably going to regret this too, but I actually find that very slight doglegs on the outside of tight curves looks right- but before others pile in, I mean VERY slight as this is prototypical (whether for the same reason you've outlined but scaled up or due to force of the wheel set on the outer rail 'straightening' them. I know that won't make me popular for suggesting it, but what's new. You're quite right about the keys immediately adjacent to the fishplates. Paul's post didn't make that clear and I know plenty of people moving to finer track make the mistake of pointing ALL keys towards the centre of a panel. I made the same mistake myself first time.

I'm probably going to regret disagreeing with anyone, based on past experience, but: I'm not going to try and tell you that you're wrong- if that works for you then it's none of my business. But it is certainly not a universally agreed method. Indeed, if it's complex pointwork then you're going to have to cut insulation gaps at various points. What I would agree with is that it's perfectly possible to build un-realistically long sections with a view to cutting the rail once it's secured. Very true. But remember not all regions and not all eras did this. Also if someone is going to this extent then they need to look at whether they had the heavy duty cast chair for the last sleeper. That's true for a bi-directional line on the flat. On uni-directional the keys are hammered towards the direction of travel. You will also find they should be hammered in towards the lower end of gradients and towards stations. Of course local policy or requirements could dictate otherwise. Don't forget the track panel end- the key is ALWAYS hammered in towards the rail joint (otherwise there's not enough room for a 4 bolt fishplate).

Hello Morphaniel Are you asking about the practice of 'simulating' scale track panels or asking what those panels should be? You are right that track panels on the mainline evolved to 60ft in the end. Branches could be former of either 45ft or 30ft panels. However, I seem to recall seeing 60ft panels on a branch (Esk Valley) and also some station areas on the mainline would have had 30ft and 45ft panels. The general rule: rail starts on the mainline, when renewed it is used on branch and secondary lines if good enough and when that in turn is relayed it is moved to sidings. As for the policy of simulating rail panels in P4- you can put cosmetic fishplates on the rail and as long as you space the sleepers right for the imagined rail ends, it would look passable. Some people notch the rail top, others don't on the basis that it doesn't look realistic and gathers dirt. Others then cut each rail length to the required length and build each panel prototypically. Like in any other scales/ gauges, how far to go depends on the builder. One thing I would really strongly advocate against: mixing real wood on turnouts with plastic sleepers on plain track. Derek

To back up the comments made by @Izzy and others, my Dad was a Stratford based Driver in the 70s and he never had a bad word to say about them, stating that 'The Clactons' was his favourite rostered duty. He described them as fast, smooth (Commonwealth bogies I'm guessing without looking) and quiet(ish). It was only one of two UK stock that he wanted to have a model of (the other being the J72- the first locomotive he passed on.) @74009 many thanks for the sharing this with us all. It is a quite impressive and inspirational project which, out of respect for my late Dad, I shall be following myself in 2021.

Hello Simon Thanks but it's the quality of the 3D print that's the subject of my question. Your renderings look really very good, but they don't show the 'grain' and what-not of the printing. I notice some of your models are available in the more expensive print but some are only available in the more basic material; why that is, I don't know but I expect you have a good reason for it. I'm particularly after a set of the AM10/ 310, but a four-car print would be an expensive way to find out what the print quality is. Unless there's any way to get them 3D resin printed, which appears to be a better method. Anyway, excellent renderings, really good and please don't take my concern over Shapeways as any form of criticism against your really excellent design skills.

Hello Simon I've seen your impressive collection of 3D renders and quite understand the point you made to someone once before who asked if you had an actual photograph of XYZ, to which you pointed out that it would be prohibitively expensive to 3D print all your catalogue. But are there any you have printed in the, please? Don't get me wrong your 3D design skills look exceptional and not part of my concern, but I am not the greatest fan of Shapeways, especially in the lower plastics. I've just realised if I look at this thread in Firefox, there are several pictures. Many thanks Derek

The sleeper spacing on the diverging road looks somewhat generous. If replicated in reality, I doubt it would survive many trains before the rail broke. (constructive criticism- good luck with the project)

@Wagpnmaster I'd go along with that as an idea. If we could make it work for X class, we could- in time- do the same for pretty much any class. I have little experience of the silhouette cutter and more or less nil for the 3D printing, but I have seen some extraordinary results from 3D resin printers- some really crisp designs.

@JDW looking through this thread again, I know this will make me unpopular with many on RMW, but with the modifications you've made to the Lima 156, I still think it is the best 156 RTR/modified model available at the moment. I dare say the British Geological Survey will report an eruption in South Yorkshire as I've dared to have this opinion, but there you go. I can't really put my finger on it- except the already mentioned issue of rivets on the other model and the partially correct Wipac light cluster.

Sorry I'm behind on this, but I recall someone from the 5mm society once showing me how he built a 313. He made a 'box' like structure out of stiff plasticard (which is essentially what all MU interiors look like) then added contoured ribs every X distance, before then adding on a sheet of quite thin plasticard over the formers. I think he might have then glued a further thin sheet over it to give it rigidity. Then he popped in glazing- which was flush in an era when flush glazing was a rarity. The reason I mention that is producing those formers now, with laser or silhouette etc should make it really easy to produce multiple formers exactly the same. The added advantage is that this even partially mimics the way the real thing is built. However, it doesn't help with cab fronts which are a completely different area.

I've recently had a go with a Cameo Silhouette cutter and found it perfect for such things. I did a couple of rough runs for parts to help design a brass kit (a steam locomotive) but the parts came out well enough to design the whole body in plastic. It was only a borrowed machine, but I'm off to buy one of my own on payday. There are a couple of threads on here about using them. It might be worth a look.