Chamby

Greetings, Headstock. It’s early days yet for me, as I have only been working this up in earnest recently. The fourteen so far, based on a midweek non-Summer service, would be: 16T mineral “Runner” Mixed freight “Runner” Steel “Runner” Fish Pick-up Goods Oil for Abbey Lane Local “Ord” x2 Fast/Semi-fast South Yorkshireman Master Cutler WR inter-regional SR inter-regional Parcels/Newspaper So 14 as there will be times when more than one “Ord” will be required. Also I haven’t included the odd through light engine working, and I’m also not yet sure whether I’ll need a separate train for “The Newspaper” and “The Rabbits”... I’m still looking into those. Of course given the number of Runners a much greater selection of through freight rakes is highly desirable. I also have a PW rake to be run occasionally.... What are your 16?

Lots of ways to achieve this. My first approach would be a changeover microswitch fixed to, and activated by the point motor...

I owned a boat, a few years ago. Within the boating community, it was a recognised phenomenon that people often wanted a bigger and bigger boat, until they got one that was too big for them to easily handle, or too expensive to keep/maintain. I think model railways may be similar? My railway room is 16 feet by 11, I would like something bigger but I must admit that for a single builder/modeller/operator, it is a nice size to work within... albeit with one exception: The main problem I have found is regarding the fiddle yard, they just take up so much of the available space, especially if modelling a main line. But if you don’t have one big enough, it really limits your layout’s operating potential! For my own layout, to run anything like the prototype, I need at least 14 different trains in each direction... requiring the same size again as the model itself, which is impossible within my available space unless I introduce different levels and undesired gradients. It is this that keeps bringing my mind back to a desire for something bigger. Is there anyone out here who who thinks they have gone ‘over the top’ and taken on something too big?

A Gresley or Thompson full brake in the SW is perfectly feasible. Daily services ran from Newcastle and York to Swindon and the South Coast, via the GC and Banbury, sections of which were diagrammed for onward passage throughout the Western and Southern regions. Parcel vans were also detached at Woodford Halse from the more numerous Sheffield and Nottingham to Marylebone services, and tagged onto inter-regional services from there. NE CCT vans, as well as the Thompson and Gresley bogie stock. All a part of normal business. On a completely different tack, have you plans to model the Broccoli traffic? A regular run from Ponsandane to Paddington, using ex-beastie wagons.

I feel for you guys in Oz, but every cloud has a silver lining and your loss will probably be our gain... The quality and pace of your modelling and associated posts have been even more excellent than usual of late, and I for one look forward to more! And yes, if it all gets too much the S********n would make an excellent modelling interlude, something completely different. Although it will signal the end of an epic era of banter, if this particular project is actually completed!

Superb stuff. This is a perfect example of a model railway running in its landscape. A single track running through and surrounded by beautifully observed scenic modelling of a very high standard. In the context of the current discussions about amassing a surfeit of models and embarking on ambitious model railway projects, along with many I am guilty as charged... but this is an excellent riposte. Well done, Tom!

If you follow that through to its logical conclusion, then the ‘last man standing’ will probably be a centenarian who has acquired a very large collection indeed... Perhaps an extreme view, but I think we all understand that the future of the hobby will be much more diversified than of old. But there should still be a home for at least the better quality kit-built items.

SUMMERTIME DISTRACTIONS My apologies for the lack of recent updates. All is rather quiet on the modelling front at the moment, summertime in Cornwall tends to be taken up with family visits and outdoor house maintenance. As they say down here, "If you have a sea view, you also get a storm view" and that's certainly been my experience. So it is best to focus on property maintenance whilst the weather remains favourable, as there will be plenty of time later in the year for modelling activities once the weather turns... though I'd rather not have discovered that painting pebble-dash is even more tedious than ballasting! Thanks to the link provided earlier by @tigerburnie I have now acquired the GC working timetable for 1953 from wttreprints.uk, which shows almost 170 trains to/from/through Leicester Central on a typical autumn weekday in 1953. Although at the later end of my modelled timescale, it appears that the non-seasonal traffic movements were mostly consistent from one timetable to the next, so I will take it as being indicative enough for my chosen period of 1948-52. The timetable clearly shows the massive scale of freight movements on the GCLE, mostly operating between Annesley and Woodford Halse, that the line was renowned for. Many of these timetabled moments require some further investigations to distinguish between general freight and coal trains, which are both listed as 'class H' movements, although some of the listed trains show the colliery from which the train originated, which helps. Many, though, will presumably have been worked separately from the colliery to Annesley, and there re-marshalled into longer rakes. Some photographs suggest that, at least in later years, the general freight and coal wagons were often mixed and just sent with the next available train. Whilst most of the Runners and Windcutters simply ran through Leicester Central station, the passenger services are another matter. Leicester MPD primarily supported the passenger and parcel workings, as it was both the half-way point between Marylebone and Manchester, and local services both originated and terminated there. So I also need to factor in all the associated locomotive, carriage and wagon shunting movements that supported the timetabled services. So far, I have transferred all the provided timetabled details for Leicester Central onto a spreadsheet, and am now starting to add in the additional supporting movements. So I am taking the opportunity of these summer evenings to re-read through my library of books on the GC, and cross-referencing information from both the text and photographs with the WTT. This is proving invaluable for identifying the locomotive classes associated with each train, and providing examples of the stock formations and supporting movements. Inevitably, it is the more unusual workings that are most often referenced in the books, a disproportionate amount of photo's seem to feature the Great Western hauled services, and the long freight workings also feature strongly because of their sheer number and distance covered. Much of the information provided also relates to the late fifties and 1960's, after the line had been transferred to the Midland Region when much changed as the line was progressively run down. There appears to be relatively little information regarding the local services, at least in the tomes I have reviewed so far. Still, no-one said this would be easy, and I find this investigative aspect of the hobby very absorbing so it is good to still have mysteries to unravel! On the modelling front, my son has recently sent me a further delivery of 3D printed canopy sections, that I am slowly cleaning up and separating from their supporting 'sprues' ready for assembly. These re-designed parts will be used to create the central section of the station with its full-width canopy, for which I will need to scratch-build the station buildings, albeit in a rather shortened form. Therefore, the current four through platforms will morph into the more prototypical 'H' shape with only two through platforms on the outside faces, and the two inside platforms will be in-filled for their middle third, thereby leaving four shorter bay platforms (two at each end of the station). This halves the number of through platforms, and therefore my model station's capacity to hold long trains, but this is a price worth paying as I have come to the decision that for me, modelling accuracy trumps play value, and it will allow me to more accurately reproduce the prototypical services and operations of the real place, back in the day.

I’m guessing it would be left behind in the cab at what becomes the rear of the train, when travelling in the opposite direction on the return journey?

I don’t want to go back even just 8 months into the past. That national lockdown, with Covid rampant before we got double vaccinated, was not a good time and I will never view it as such.

Don’t worry, “awesome” shows your age... these days it’s “awsum” !

The photo with the shunter sandwiched in between two rakes of clay hoods gives an indication of the shunting process used at the Wenford dries. Probably a different situation though compared to what you have at Wheal Veronica, re: gradients?

Tony must be psychic… or else he has inside information??? The RRP is exactly the same as he was asking!

It looks like there is a moulded oval on the side of the smoke box where the works plate would be. Perhaps a touch of brass paint might pick it out? Phil

I spent much of my working life immersed in spreadsheets and documents and have to say that those skills continue to serve me well in retirement and my hobby. I am currently working up a timetable and movements schedule for my layout based on this: Transferring the information within onto a spreadsheet allows me to continuously build up all sorts of additional details such as stock formations and the locomotives used, from reference books and photographs as I read through them. I can also consolidate the information that is directly relevant to the specific location being modelled, making it much more user-friendly without having to cannibalise the source document. I would struggle to organise this kind of information without IT. That said, hardware is another thing altogether! About three years ago, when my computer died, I switched from a Windows OS to Mac, because I was fed up of the constant updates, the slow start-up times and how many of my peripherals like the printer and scanner stopped working because the latest windows update wasn’t supported by their drivers. Since moving to Mac, all my peripherals now work again ( even the very old ones), waiting for things to boot up is a thing of the past, and my phone, tablet and computer all seem to swop stuff automatically without me having to do anything! That’s particularly useful re: stuff like accessing photo’s I’ve taken on my phone, directly from my computer. I’m not wanting to start an apple versus Microsoft debate here, that’s for other places, I’m just saying how I find things useable in the context of my hobby. That said, I still have to use an old windows laptop for stuff like programming DCC chips and track-plan software, that are not Mac compatible. And as for 3D printing and laser cutting... they are impossible without all the associated IT. The modern hobby and IT are becoming inseparable!

Do you seriously expect it to pull the dynamometer car?

It’s good to see things are moving apace down under. With the lockdown restrictions gone, and those of us up here in the northern hemisphere enjoying mid-summer, we’ve a lot of distractions from our own modelling time at the moment. One quick question... are you planning to let the scenery flow between St Enodoc and Indian Queens Halt, or will you install a backscene/scenic break? Visually, that will make quite a difference.

.

But they would have to buy a second kit anyway, to model both the wagon ends that are still visible... and what about the underframe and wheel sets? It sounds much more trouble than it’s worth. I’m not convinced on that one.

Absolutely... well said, old chap.

Good morning @Headstock. Yes I did lay it on rather thick, but the point seems to have hit the mark, given subsequent tales of ‘the journey’ that you rightly point out is what it is all about. Your mention of ‘some imaginary sweet spot over the finish line’ is very percipient. In my case it is epitomised by the desire for a Colwick based A5 (or two) that both runs sweetly and can hold its own well enough to complement, rather than detract from the standard I eventually achieve for the rest of my layout. I have no idea yet how easy or difficult that particular kit will be to build, but all in good time!

We must not lose sight of the fact that there is a big hurdle to overcome to enter the world of kit building locomotives, that presents an enormous deterrent for newcomers. Anyone embarking on their first kit build is faced with a very different proposition from an experienced builder. The newcomer doesn’t have any of the tools required, doesn’t know any of the techniques necessary, and is faced with purchasing a kit that needs a gearbox and wheels to complete from different suppliers that may be hard to source from an unfamiliar marketplace. The kit will, likely, have inherent pitfalls for the uninitiated, requiring modifications using new and unfamiliar skills and techniques, and materials that they haven’t ever used before. This first model will cost not only the kit, but a load of expensive new tools, jigs and materials, it’s construction is a huge learning curve of unfamiliar techniques and skills. So it will have cost the newcomer rather more than an experienced builder in money, time and effort - and be of considerably poorer quality than most of the contributors on this thread can achieve. It will likely be a bit of a ‘dog’, something that would require rather a lot of ‘fettling’ should it one day find its way to Tony’s workbench! Of course, the newcomer’s second build will hopefully be of better quality (and require less financial outlay), and the third even more so, etc. until proficiency is reached. The point I am trying to make is that at the outset, it appears to be a very long and expensive journey for the newcomer to locomotive kit building, before they will reach a point where they can consistently achieve good results. Discouragingly long, for most. Add to this the fact that metalworking is no longer provided by our national curriculum, and that the end result will need a layout with minimum 3 foot radius curves to run on, it is not only a very daunting proposition, but very few will even be in a position to make full use of the end product. Therefore, those among us who are experienced enough in this field to take a kit and build it competently, will always be very much in the minority simply because the journey to get there is so daunting at the outset, that few will actually embark on it!

I am surprised to hear about Peco bullhead track being brittle. I used it extensively for my own layout, built shortly after the stuff was introduced, and had no problems. A pin vice hand drill with a fine drill bit was used to make holes in the sleepers, and Peco track pins used to lay the track. I didn’t experience a single incidence of brittleness, laying three packs of the stuff. I wonder then, have they perhaps changed the plastic more recently?

A couple of thoughts, Dylan. With a very narrow layout, you have to consider how to realistically model depth when you don’t have a lot. So something that hems in the railway, like a forest edge, cliff or retaining wall will help visually. Another trick, possible because of the 77 litre box’s height, would be to build the layout with a proscenium arch, thus restricting the viewing angle and making its narrowness less obvious. Alternatively, again thinking within the box, you can take advantage of the fact that a 77 litre Really Useful Box is taller than it is wide. So by storing the layout on its back within the box, your baseboard width could be the same as the internal height, thus increasing the viable layout depth to 34cm, though that would necessitate a lower backscene. However if your primary goal is to demonstrate your company’s existing baseboard product, rather than maximise the possibilities within the internal dimensions of the 77 litre box, my apologies.

Bl**dy cheek... Pirate country, please. And remember, jam first!