rue_d_etropal

I do like the look of those curved boards. The concept of the laser cut design is good, but superb when applied to a curved module. Now with ends like on the APA box I could do a lot with them. One thing I have learned from exhibiting , has been that protecting what is on layout is important, and makes storage easier. Weight is also important, and starting with a lightweight baseboard definitely helps. Just noticed, Mozzer, that you might be having wagon turntables on layout ,(working or dummy?)

Huw, glad you remembered me . I was chatting to quite a few people. A lot has happened since Manchester Tram exhibition last year. Expect to see something in one of the tram journals, as someone is trying out my track. I don't where this year has gone. It doesn't seem that long ago talking to Ben and Phil at Doncaster, and about putting something in magazine. Chris Leigh had just done a feature in Model Rail, so it was decided to wait. It has, though, given me more time to perfect some things, and try some new ideas.

Huw, you make some interesting points about availability of products. It is not just the case you mention, but many of the traditionally produced items, often by one man outfits. All sorts of things can interrupt production, from holiday(??), sickness and retirement. This was one of the reasons I started looking at 3D printing, as it was (in theory) possible to design something and when I was absolutely happy with it, it would then be available for as long as 3D printing services existed. As it is an internet based set up this has not suited everyone, but I think there are ways to get over that hurdle. What Phil has said, has also made me think. People these days seem to want something which is easier to set up, so I started looking at an improved insert system for my track, which (fingers crossed) looked about right, Still need to test some other bits. I had not realised Phil was going to use code 75 track until I saw the article, and so I have started looking at that as an option, still in test phase. I hope to have something to show at Blackburn show in a couple of weeks. Innovation is in effect is what I am doing, as far as the technology to produce it. New ideas will always attract attention, DCC does not really attract as much attention at exhibitions these days, and DCC sound seems to either not be possible to hear in a noisy exhibition hall, or annoys other exhibitors because it is too loud. I remember David Boyle saying there were not enough 'action' things available. Maybe these are seen by many as gimmicks, but I am sure many of us remember the Triang Hornby action wagons, and how much fun they were. It is usually difficult to get near any layout with some action features, such as a crane/digger loading a wagon. When demonstrating/education getting the balance right between something which attracts more attention and something that is practical and possibly less likely to break down, is important. One difference between the college classroom, and the exhibition hall is that people can move onto something else, they are not there just for the demonstrations. This is something I need to put some thought into for some demonstrations I am doing next year.

This is the type of discussion I was hoping for, which is why I was a bit disappointed when Phil said he wasn't having inlaid track. It would make a good discussion topic in the magazine, as I suspect more people might see it. From my own experiments with very sharp curves(for a narrow gauge layout), I found that shorter wheelbases bogies ran a lot better than longer ones, as the wheel flange would ride up on the infill, even on my non finescale gaps. On gently curved sidings I would not only get away with longer wheelbases, but also be able to have a narrower flangeway. Any running problems would then be more likely to have been caused by uneven track . I am currently experimenting with an infill/wrap around for code 75 track. On searching out inspiration, I noticed many urban dockside lines were upgraded with flat infill, possibly a post war necessity due to bomb damage, so I am also looking at something with a flat surface. This will allow far more varied and complex track layouts as well, but does not have that 'quaint' dockside look some want.

Formcraft, that it is. Didn't they also look at something for 7mm scale. Also remember big panels, to reduce amount of work, and corner units. The flat brickwork is relatively easy, I even considered cutting up some Slaters plastic sheet, but the corners ..... I have most of my brickwork now, but got distracted by other 3D printing ideas. Something for code 75 rail on the cards!!!!!!

sjrixon said Well it is only for show, partly to show comparison of one of my full point items and the inlays used on other points. One of the things about quayside railways is the amount of track there is sometimes, some of it disused as it is too much trouble to rip it up. I have even seen it on tramways. Just a plug , but I am at Blackburn show in a couple of weeks,with my 1/35th scale WW1 layout,not a dock layout, but will have some 3D printed track to look at.

Looking forward to the Locomotion. Just had a quick search, as I had remembered Bachmann doing a model for one of their anniversaries, and found they did a model(static?) for their 175 anniversary. It was only when I saw the picture on magazine website that it pretty well confirmed I had seen it before.

Full size mock ups are still best way to try out ideas. Chances are you have a baseboard sorted out or something right size. Covering it with lining paper is a good idea,especially if the 'baseboard' is something used for other purposes(eg table top). Peco were years ahead with their templates, pity their OO setrack ones are still not available online. I used similar idea by creating templates for my own track system. Sometimes we are drawn to modern technology and forget about older ideas and methods. The skill is to know how to use the best of each. I explore quite a few ideas for 3D printing, but quite often realise traditional ways, including scratchbuilding is just as good. At least I do get the fun and challenge of designing something on computer, and it usually does not cost me any money. Some of these ideas show other possibilities, so are still useful prototypes.

Phil, I did send Ben a short article about my 'Monkey Island' mini layout. Would have been a few months ago, I was going to give him a nudge to see if he still wanted it. I am also updating a thread on my new 'Warwick Quay' module in this forum. Monkey Island was built before I had designed the wagon turntables, and it's French cousin Ile de Singe was in Continental Modeller at start of the year. Both were only built last September and October in Ikea APA boxes. Both are intended to be used as part of my demonstration stand at Heywood show. For the flangeways, it is a case of compromise, I have given enough space for older stock(many starting in the hobby start out with cheap second hand, something I witnessed a lot when runing local model railway shop), and it would not be difficult filling part of it to make it slimmer. A fellow member on Gnatterbox forum (Michael Mott) tried using some thin paper tissue I think. It looked very good. I am thinking of trying something similar with my point inlays. The only difficult part to build on my full point sections(not the inlays), is the point blades and tiebars. I have managed on a couple, so it does not need to be an expert track builder. I also have made it possible for either live or dead frog, but only code 100 rail. The minimum thicknesses for 3d printed plastic, make using anything smaller very close to not being possible. As I said, much of the rail is hidden. My two mini layouts were built for demonstration purposes, not just to show off the track, but to show one in OO and one in HO, thus showing differences and similarities. Educating the punters is important to me, and I have found many welcome my different approach to the hobby. Thought it might be useful to add photo of Monkey Island. Note it is also dual level, and has tall warehouse buildings(Miniart, because I was less bothered about bond on this model, but would use LCUT now for stretcher bond)

Phil, I know you have a lot of experience with quayside models, but I have not found a problem putting wagons back on inlaid track. In fact I find it easier, especially with bogie stock. That apart, ease of building was one big reason I designed my track system. Points are the most difficult track, but anyone with point building skills should be able to build a fully working point . My own point building is not very good so I tend to use the inserts I have. Not as good looking , but the points work OK. I will be looking at other track geometry in future. Biggest hurdle for me is limit on file size, which limits number of stone setts I can have, and my aging laptop tends to fall asleep when I give it too much work to do! As for seeing which way points are set, there are a variety of ways to make this easier. A simple indicator light on control panel is easiest. Easy way to get around the brickwork is to assume buildings are pre 1880( this is when NORI bricks were first made, so older buildings may well have plain stretcher bond. It is also a lot easier to get corners looking right. Does anyone remember some plastic corner sections for model brickwork many years ago. I seem to remember something , maybe part of a system which used brick panels in 4mm scale. Not the Linka system before anyone suggests that. This was serious 4mm scale stuff. Maybe I should ask Ben if I can build the next quayside layout! I am demonstrating my track system at Heywood show next year, and am at Blackburn show in a couple of weeks, so hope to have a few bits to show alongside my 1/35th scale WW1 layout. It should also give me somewhere to run some of my normally unused WW1 locos which are a bit more fuzzy about sharp curves! Layout was only originally designed for small locos, and it will be its last outing.

I was looking forward to this project, mainly because of my 3D printed track. Phil has gone down the code 75(code 83 for the Tillig) route. As there is very little rail showing in inset track, the finer rail does not, in my opinion add enough for most people. The extra point 6mm also helps with running, as traditional infill does cause problems with some people(here and elsewhere)I do like the appearance of the Tillig track, and will consider it for one of my own (non inset) track projects. I picked up some old Formaway(Graham Farrish) OO flexi track at an exhibition, thinking it was O16.5 as the sleepers were slightly bigger, but am actually considering that for another OO project. Despite being approximately 2mm under gauge, it does look slightly better. The great thing about a dockside layout is that it can be done in a small space and still have a lot of operating potential and skilled driving. Much easier to store and carry around a sub 3ft long layout than a 6ft one. I am experimenting with a lot of new ideas on my own Warwick Quay OO(code 100) layout. I have included a couple of my own working turntables. I talked to one of the demonstrators on the EM/P4 stand at a local exhibition, and they agreed that my code 100 approach was OK, as much of the rail was not visible. At the end of the day, reliability was more important than being pure scale ,as some in the hobby think. There does need to be a debate on various track standards, in magazine not online forums though. Reliability for locos has dramatically improved over past 30 years. When Mainline(in effect what we now have with Bachmann) brought out extra detailed models, but were let down by the motors inside. The bodies were good enough and in many cases are still good enough, and all that is needed in many cases, is an upgraded chassis. IUt would cost a lot less(less grumbles from many in hobby). Also there is less reliance on live frog points. Phil makes the good point(no pun intended) that the weakness in the design is reliance on power going though point blades. All my points(dead frog) are modified, Continental style, so that power goes to both tracks, and I use insulated sections to isolate sidings. I have found this pretty close to 100% reliable. Looking at the base of the Peco points suggests Peco had considered this at one point. For very short locos, which still have a problem, it is easy enough to have a shunter's truck permanently coupled and wired up to for improved pickup. Those bogie diesels always seem to run better and slower. Some are very good at pointing the finger at the points, when in fact it is quite often poor track laying that is the problem with what some consider 'trainset' track. Badly bend flexi track and poorly connects rails cause many derailments. Noticed Bachmann had their advert for quayside building in magazine, now that is a coincidence!. Talking of buildings, I hope as much consideration will be given to the brickwork. For most people the brick bond might not matter, but if other scale issues matter then the brickwork should also be right. It is something I have looked into myself,

I will be interested to see how the infills work out,. I was tempted to do something for laser cutting, but infills can only go so far. Still need to hide sleepers, which can be done. Never know, you might decide you like inset track you want to build something else. As for wagon turntables, it is never too cramped to fit one. Silhouette cutters, I thought could only cut, or can they in effect engrave. For large area of stone setts, I found that the Slaters 2mm scale paving slabs embossed plastic is very close in size to the stones on my larger scale(ie O and G1), that is 2 rows per 7mm. This would probably suit all areas except where stone follow curves. Reasonably low cost as well.

There is nothing wrong in doing it yourself, but one thing I have observed over the many years I have been in the hobby, has been how few layouts with inset track there have been and most of the ones I have seen use ballasted points to get round the problem of infilling the point. Having tried it on a number of occasions with various fillers, I can understand the reluctance to infill the point, especially on exhibition layouts. I don't think lack of layouts with infilled track has been through lack of interest ,but the difficulties most people have building their own track. The complex trackwork often found in very small industrial areas and dockyards, is ideal for those wanting a small layout that not only looks interesting but is fun to operate. I tried the old Hartel tram tram many years ago but its tight curves designed for trams don't suit many of our model trains. In O gauge there is the ETS system, if you can get hold of it, and it has even tighter curves. The current Tillig Luna HO tram track system, is not proper rail, and the cobbled version is just a print, yet costs about as much as my track. I tend to use second hand, cheap, flexi track as a source of rail. This all led me to considering designing something myself, which I could use myself, and offer to others. Hopefully the new BRM dockyard project will increase interest in building small layouts with inset track. and then there are my working wagon turntables. No self respecting industrial/dockyard complex should be without at least one wagon turntable, and it adds a new operating challenge and interest. I will be following progress on this layout with interest.

3D printing might look expensive, but in long term is possibly a better investment, as track can be taken up and reused in new layouts. I have been there and modified Peco points. They are tough enough to take the strain, but are not infallible. Low cost means different things in different scales. In O gauge , I think my 3D printed track is not bad value, and is relatively quick to install, so layout is finished quicker. It would certainly cost less than a Dapol Terrier.

Seems to be a lot of track vandalism there. Might I suggest my 3D printed option, which includes mixed gauge.

just got the book from France. Actually quite good, and if I work through the French there is a lot of info about the salt works. There is the photo which is on the website, as well as a slight distance view showing a Crochat loco and wagons on the salt flats(?) . The wagons, like in the other photo look like simple box wagons, 4 wheelers. Interesting there are also some photos showing standard tipper wagons, but no other photos of locos. I think there is enough to make something interesting. Something for the 100 year birthday of the locos.

Laser cutting does do brickwork nicely, but designs need to consider brick sizes on corners. My idea I am playing with using 3D printing is corner sections, which connect to each all. I think it might be trick with laser cutting though.

I only just found this thread. When I saw the article in magazine I emailed Ben to say I was impressed. I remember playing on the trackbed as a child(well nearly a teenager). My parents moved to Sevenoaks in the mid 60s, we lived just up from Riverhead on the A25. The Sevenaoks bypass was being built at the time, but we used to walk over the Chevening. I remember the bridge and the lane next to the trees on the north side of the bridge. There was no sign of the old halt, but I think we must have cycled down to Brasted station, as I remember the old station and have a couple of photos taken with my then brand new Instamatic camera. The old station at Westerham I think had already been demolished by the time I was looking around there. I remember one of my friends at school was planning a model of Westerham in P4. P4 was just starting to get publicity, but I am not sure the layout ever got built. I seem to remember my friend was the son of the no2 to the vicar at Westerham. I mentioned the new bypass, the junction with the A25 was massive, so I think there were already plans to link to the then not built M25. I certainly remember seeing footings to the north, before it was officially approved(memory not photos ). Given the route the Westerham branch line took, there would not have been room to keep it and build the motorway, so the line was doomed.

Found this , with what looks a photo of some of the wagons in background. http://www.route-bleue.com/chroniques/item/1343-les-carnets-du-parc-pnr-la-narbonnaise Also looks like there might be a book. Could not find it on Amazon though. Photos showing the locos when they arrived on CF de Tarn, show they were painted a sort of yellow with white upper on cab.

Andy I was actually wondering what the colour was on the Camargue line. All b/w photos. There was a book printed 10 years ago9now out of print and difficult to find), but the magazine was from 1978 called Chemins de Fer Regionaux et Urbans. I was sent some scans of the article, and I suspect the book was based on this (50 page) article. Luckily I was pointed to a copy on eBay so now have a proper copy of the magazine. When the book came out there was a local touring exhibition, which unfortunately I did not know about. Photos of the exhibition suggest it was the same photos published elsewhere online. I plan to write an article myself, but probably won't be able to use the photos. The loco and coach drawings I will be doing myself as the plans are only original manufacturers , not what actually got built, and the Decauville coach has no drawings at all. All this started with talk about water carrying wagons, and being pointed to an article in MRN . It was actually one of the first copies of MRN I had bought. The Crochat locos on the CF de Tarn are now in red/white(well one is ). There is also a b/w photo on one page which looks like when they first arrived. Not certain on colour, but big numbers on non door side of cab. The more I think about it, the more I want to know. With the locos coming up to being 100 years old, there might be some interest. I am initially planning to use a model of one of the locos on my layouts inspired by the film and TV series of MASH, so Asia not southern France. That is assuming the chassis will go round my sharp curves(Fleischmann 25cm radius). I have many ideas for mini layouts so it is quite possible something based in France will follow on. Another fictional salt works in the Camargue would nicely combine two ideas of mine, but it would be in 5.5mm/ft using 9mm gauge for the Crochat loco.

Only can presume it was an industrial system under military control, or involved in war work. According to the CF de Tarn website, all the stock went to the preserved line, and it was because it was 50cm that they decided to build the preserved line as 50cm gauge not 60cm as the original line. Given the effect of salt it is still amazing the locos survived for 50 years in use, and are actually now approaching their centenary.Maybe that will trigger some new articles or a book.

yes the bridge was the branch line which ran west towards St Giles. I have driven round the area a bit as my brother lives over towards St Remy, just beyond where the tourist line runs from Arles(although I have not seen much activity recently). I had assumed the line down to St Marie was standard gauge as much of the embankment still exists, but when I ,not only found out it was metre gauge and electrified, I knew I wanted to build part of it. The station next to the main road bridge in Arles still exists, so I had passed it many times without knowing. There are loads of good photos online, I just need to visit Arles to take some door/window measurements. I only plan to build the buffer end of the station , to include the station building and the remains of the water tower. I have the magazine article from the 70s, and as some of the salt wagons went to the Cf de la Mure, there are plans of those wagons. I still need to know colours of locos and stock. Oddly there is nothing in the article concerning this. Its a choice between green or red, probably. I need to do a drawing of the #modern Decauville coaches. I have the dimensions so it should be possible , even for me. I intend to 3D print the locos and rolling stock, so my design software will do the drawings based on my designs.

Was the Rhone one the one served by the CF de Camargue. Sounds like it. I have been researching that line and intend another model project. Electrified metre gauge makes a change from steam/diesel.The lines finally closed in the 1950s. It had not helped that the allies had blown up the railway bridge connecting the transhipment depot with the main line. I think this is one reason for the transfer to the line on the other side of the Rhone. Not sure why the Crochat locos were built. Info says they were built in 1918. Crochat supplied a lot of different locos at the time, including 50cm, 60cm(best known) and standard gauge.

Interesting. The current tourist train is almost certainly a road train. It is even more interesting as it is closer to my house than the CF de Tarn, so would make an interesting project. I checked one of my books on industrial railways of France and nothing in it, a pity. I would expect photos of the line during its operating time to be around somewhere. According to one site, the locos were built during WW1, and sold to the Salin du Midi in 1919. Amazing to have actually survived at all.

I have just designed a 3D printed model of the 50cm gauge Crochat petrol electric locos no on the CF de Tarn. I noticed from info on website that they came from Salins du Midi(Aude). Just wondering if anyone has more info, especially photos. The preserved locos look like they have been modified slightly.