Chamby

Indeed, I was disappointed to see the price of a pack of four Kadee NEM uncouplers suddenly rise dramatically during lockdown, after a period of poor availability: by as much as 50% at the majority of retailers. This will definitely be a deterrent to people currently making a decision upon which system to standardise on. As a result, I have started to use more of the Hornby/Roco couplers within ‘permanently’ fixed coach rakes, with Kadees installed just on each end.

A vote for Kadee’s: they also allow you to simply lift coaching stock in and out of rakes. I find that the Hornby/Roco one’s are best for complete rakes that need to be pushed as part of their operating cycle... they have no ‘slack’ to take up when being propelled around curves, so retain better alignment.

I would hope that LB might have the same fate as befell Retford and Buckingham, as one of those layouts that deserves to outlive their owner... but surely that won’t need considering for a good while yet!

If it ain’t bust, don’t fix it, as they say. Are you trying to get something to work, that you don’t really need to, and might end up causing you more issues down the line? The GW standardised for a reason... Just asking the question

Yes, the inconsistent curve was the first thing I noticed too, though I held back from mentioning it. One long smooth curve, with the crossover on the same radius and transitions at either end, would look much better.

Tony, it sounds like it has been a lot of hard work, and some angst, but that figure above is an achievement. I am sure that both the widow and CRUK will be deeply grateful for your efforts, and that’s what ultimately matters here.

2400 - The Raven A2 City of Newcastle. As a non-RTR mainline locomotive, only available kit-built, that’s rather fitting for this thread!

Added to that, you can apply the 80/20 rule... 80% of the interest will come from 20% of the followers. So 60-ish? I’m guessing that Tony will have heard from rather less than that. 60-ish would not be a problem for the occasional locomotive, but with a large batch you’ll need a very high pick-up rate, or a few people finding themselves with deep pockets at the right time. For my part, I’m ‘in the market’ for a couple of specific items, especially if they’ve been checked over by Tony, but they haven’t appeared. That might also be a part of the problem... Wright’s Writers often have very specific interests and needs!

First impressions, Jesse... that’s a drastic bit of re-modelling! The larger radius curve looks better though, and dropping part of the baseboard for a viaduct will also look good. To my eye, larger radius turnouts would also improve the track flow. That perception might just be down to the perspective in these photo's, but it would be worth checking versus original images. That would strengthen the argument to build your own - as others have said, you only need five of them.

I would hope that LSGC will still be retained as a club layout even if it is withdrawn from the exhibition circuit. The same thing is happening locally with a large club exhibition layout, it will remain available for public viewing on club open days. It’s the logistics that poses the biggest problem… transport, manning, setting up and dismantling are all avoided if you keep it - but don’t take it out!

A couple of photo’s of steam on the Carbis branch: Page 127 of British Railways Past and Present No.54 (East Cornwall) shows a brake van excursion with two prairies propelling around 10 brake vans into the wharf. It shows that there is a raised wharf alongside the siding furthest away from the dries. ISBN 1-85895-244-1 Also BRP&P No. 17 (Cornwall) page 85 shows Pannier No 1664 alongside the dries, bunker facing towards Bugle, coupled at its firebox end to two Toad brake vans, both with their verandah’s facing Bugle. So double brake van working might be implied? The raised wharf is also visible, it looks to be reduced to about 3-4 wagons long (July 1960). ISBN 1-85895-060-0 I don’t have any photo’s of clay wagons at the site, though. Most of the available photos are rail tour related, rather than day-to-day working.

Re: the effect of viewing angle on the spacing of lining, I concur that it is probably an optical effect. If there was a deliberate adjustment of spacing to compensate for viewing at an angle, it would surely be to widen the spacing on vertical lining? The Montreux Oberland Bahn in Switzerland used, until recently, a logo that took advantage of this phenomenon. The logo itself was very elongated, looking odd when viewed straight on, but reading much more easily when viewed from an angle as would be the norm for most passengers on a platform: Apologies for the poor depth of field, these photos taken using a mobile phone.

I just had another idea... how about a landing strip for the Shackleton? Hat, coat...

Yes, either one of those with a Cornish engine house on top... or even better, a “White Mountain” china clay spoil heap with rope-worked tippler wagons taking the spoil to the top.

There’s a machine-translated description from a Japanese website, describing it as an LNER design from the 1930’s that has been active at a British power station for 50 years. Apparently the lights don’t work because it has convex convexity, and “because the locomotive is diverted, the position of lights and doors and shape of the dolly are different from the actual vehicle”. Another website wishfully describes it as an ES-1 style electric locomotive, from Gaugemaster/Kato. Others sites illustrate the product in different liveries, described as a Chibi-Totsu freight locomotive... I think that gives you an indication of its provenance. Probably best described as ‘freelance’ from a British perspective. I can’t link to the sites from my i-pad but a google search of ‘British railways E3682’ takes you there.

Re: the use of vans to carry the tarps... I haven't heard about this before, so apologies but I am left wondering... is this a fact, or speculation? There are a great many photographs of long and short rakes of empty clay wagons without a van in the rake, so it was certainly not de rigeur. The references I have to the use of vans all state they are for the carriage of bagged/palleted clay. Re: shunting movements at the dries, the operation sounds similar to the operation of Lower Ruddle Yard on the Trenance branch. Approached by a 1:40 gradient, the locomotive always operated at the ‘lower’ end of the train and was under strict instructions not to uncouple from the train until the guard had applied the van brake and either sprigged the wheels or applied the brakes of sufficient wagons to prevent rolling away. Shunting movements were also not permitted during hours of darkness, presumably owing to the risk of runaway wagons? The other traffic that could be included on the branch is the occasional short (2-3 wagons) coal train delivering fuel to the dryers, typically propelled by a pannier tank.

If the wagons have their covers on, you won't be able to tell whether they're "full" or empty anyway....

Shame that both she and 60103 are carrying the same livery at the moment. I thought Tornado looked most stunning when painted in BR blue a few years back....

I have followed the gearbox discussion with interest over the last few pages. There’s a whiff of the ‘modelling’ versus RTR argument here, in this case regarding just the motor/gearbox component of locomotive building. I guess, financial and ability arguments aside, it comes down to how important it is to you to be able say ‘I made that’, and the sense of satisfaction thus derived.

Another simple method to measure the drop along a curve is to ‘walk’ a pair of dividers along the track centre line.

Should be fine for a brace of panniers or 41xx's though? I recall that somewhere in the distant past of this thread, you posted an overall plan for the proposed layout... it would be useful for us mere observers if you can post that again, to see how this recent work fits in to your master plan re: where the new branch lines are heading!

Regarding Hush Hush... After a lengthy discussion, we have arrived at the conclusion that ‘Battleship Grey’ is a general moniker for a range of shades rather than a specific colour. Also, the specific grey used on Hush Hush was a mix of black and white pigment pastes. This discussion could be a long one... I assume that pantones were not yet in use at the time?

It's a bit of a motley mix. I have used mostly World war Scenics, with some Woodland Scenics and Peco: The base coat is 4mm length, a mix of Summer, Muddy and Spring shades from the War World Scenics range. It creates a nice finish but looks more like a park than more natural countryside! I then use the Peco static grass adhesive spray, after masking the walls and path: The spray is used in 'blobs' on open grass, and along the embankments where I want the grass to be coarser and longer: Finally I use a bit more spray in small patches on top of the straw to build up thicker growth. I used 2mm dark green, resulting in this effect: There isn't an exact science for this. Observation of the real thing, and using a mix of lengths and shades soon creates a melange of colours and lengths that produces the effect. I'll be adding a representation of buddlea's and foxgloves to the embankments and wilder areas in due course. This was my first attempt at static grassing, it's easier than you think, just rather messy! A hand-held vacuum cleaner also helps to recycle the surplus that doesn't stick to the layout. It makes a nice mix of random colours and lengths that can simply be used again. Phil

Agreed, at least in Leicestershire, line side fencing would have been the norm. I haven't modelled this section of the line on any particular location, I just wanted a generic section of countryside up and running to watch my trains run through. I had in mind perhaps something farther north between Nottingham and Sheffield, but again the stone walling was in my head... and available. As I also use the layout to exercise my modern image and Cornish trains, I am not too precious about accuracy on this section at the moment. My philosophy is to get things up and running, pleasing to the eye and looking presentable to family and friends, but then develop the accuracy over time, piece-by-piece, because this is an ongoing modelling project through my retirement rather than being built to a deadline. There are far more pressing modelling priorities on the layout at the moment, but knowing me, it will become more of a niggle as the layout develops, then lineside fencing will probably be substituted. It's just the way my mind works!

Photographs of ‘Hush Hush’ show that it had ‘No.10000’ painted on the front buffer beam in typical LNER style. I’m not aware of any other LNER loco that displayed its number on a buffer beam painted in any other colour than red, but my knowledge is far from exhaustive on the subject.