Chamby

Hi Andrew, Rather than just put in a tiny section of platform, which would make things more operationally correct but to my mind it would just look wrong... are there any precedents for this arrangement on the railway network? I'd rather, as you suggested earlier, just operate the layout 'as is' utilising the central roads as if they were bays. Alternatively I think I would retain the South Bay in full, and install the central island section and buildings, leaving a token North Bay sufficient to hold a locomotive. Aesthetically that would be much better I think, and I'll probably go down that route if more space isn't available to me in due course. In the meantime there is a great deal of other aspects of this layout that I can be getting on with, before having to make that call! Thanks for your input and kindest regards, Phil

Looks like you might have added additional accessories to your system recently, for the branch extension? That could mean additional residual current draw, and/or added background ‘chatter’ that is now testing the capability of your supply. The fact that both both points and trains were affected suggests that you feed both from the same power unit? Might be worth thinking about separating them, as your railway empire grows!

Good morning Andrew. You are absolutely right. Perhaps given the space available, It might have been truer to model something smaller, further down the line, such as Loughborough or Rugby. But that would be operationally bland in comparison. So I decided, for better or worse, to capture as much of the essence of Leicester Central as I can within the spatial constraints of my home, and my being a one-man ‘jack of all trades and master of none’ in the modelling sense. I have deliberately not called the model ‘Leicester Central’ because it just isn't... to purists (and myself) it will always be a bit of a curate’s egg, especially in the short term. Regarding the canopy glazing specifically, I came to the same conclusion as yourself about the restricted view from the corrugated covering, especially when viewed from above. I decided to retain the original glazing and will only weather it lightly, for that very reason. I appreciate that each of these individual decisions takes me a little further away from the true prototype, but these are all considered decisions that we all must make, within our own tolerances. Operationally as well, I don’t have space for a monster fiddle yard, or the capacity to accurately model every locomotive and coach in every formation that this location saw. But I do intend to field a decent cross section of representative services, and get as close to the operational subtleties as I can. This will only ever be my personal model railway, and I won’t make claims beyond It being a rather contrived blend of prototype and forced compromise. A pastime and retirement project, as accurate as I can make it, within the rather significant constraints that I have.

Hi Andrew. Yes the bay platforms are currently modelled as through platforms and that is deliberate... for now. Leicester Central was a long platform at 1245 feet and the long bays at each end are a distinctive feature. I currently have 16 feet available for my layout and severe compromises are required. Platforms are currently 8 feet long. If I modelled the full ‘H’ then the bays would be way too short and the island buildings in the middle also severely compromised. I considered modelling one end of the station accurately, but in the end decided to remove the centre section completely and run the bays into each other as through lines. There is a baseboard join deliberately located in the middle of the platforms, the plan being to insert an additional section with all the island platform structures and bay-ends at a later date, restoring the H shape. A future project for either when I can relocate to a larger room, or for a possible extended format for exhibiting. I have some Bachmann RTP Great Central buildings that fit on the platforms temporarily at the north end. The south end will be more to prototype , with the twin water towers and their connecting pipe, and the lattice girders spanning the centre roads between the canopies making its heritage obvious to those in the know. The signalling and operation will still keep the outside platforms as the main running lines. You are correct in that many of the canopies had their original glazing replaced with corrugated sheets by the early fifties, particularly either side of the bays. I’m glazing them all for now, as the architect originally intended, but they will be easy enough to cover over later as the whole model becomes closer to the prototype and I can proclaim it as a genuine model rather than a constrained derivation. The approach trackwork also has been simplified using modified proprietary items for now, the outside slips, asymmetric scissor crossings and a 3-way left hand turnout are all in the future plan. I have never built my own trackwork before now, but will do, to achieve this. This is a one-man retirement project that needed to have something up and running quickly, but will progressively develop over the long-term as a learning journey that sees the layout evolve ever closer to the prototype as I progress. I plan to do it all myself, but learning from others along the way. I appreciate that this is perhaps an unusual approach, but for me right now, it’s all about the modelling journey and I don’t mind at all that the final destination is some time and probably several iterations ahead. .

Image copyright is fine I think, if you are the originator of the image. What frustrates me immensely is when people claim copyright of old images that they had no part in producing and in most cases have come into someone's possession somewhere down the line, and now appear to be being monetised for personal profit. Much of what is 'copyrighted' in the railway world is stuff of genuine historical interest that properly belongs in a national archive and should be made open for public, non-commercial use. It's a shame that copyright doesn't have an expiry date on it, rather like patents do.

A request for prototype information, if I may. I am currently building my station platform canopy. Based on Leicester (LNER), I am struggling to find any colour photographs of the canopy structure during the early nationalisation period... most images available on the web are either in black-and-white or depict the station after it was transferred over to the London Midland region in the late fifties. Reference sources suggest that it was one of the first stations to be repainted in the revised LNER scheme introduced in 1936/7, and it probably retained this scheme through early nationalisation and right up to the point of 'midland-isation'. To the best of my knowledge, I don't think Leicester (along with many other ex-LNER stations) ever saw the intended BR(E) scheme in blue. The revised LNER scheme is described as being Deep Cream BS381C 353 for the canopies and valences, Buckingham Green (aka Deep Brunswick Green BS381C 227) for the columns, and a paler Sea Green BS381C 217 (not dissimilar to Wedgwood Green) for the support brackets and girder frame. I have no reason to doubt the reference sources, but have no recollection of ever seeing this scheme painted on a canopy supported by columns. I am wondering if anyone has any personal recollection, or independent photographic record of this colour scheme generally (or otherwise for Leicester) before I progress too far down this route? As an aside, this canopy project is a first venture for me into 3D printing, as the distinctive shape of the canopy is not available commercially. I struck a deal with my son, whereby I bought him a 3D printer and in return he's designing and producing bespoke components for my railway, to my brief. He's done a cracking job of it so far... I'll post more about it in due course, but here's a photo of the basic structure: Columns, girder frames and valences are still to add at this stage, the canopies are just placed on the platform for a first impression. Oh, and I've discovered a model railway task that's even more tedious than ballasting... glazing platform canopies! Phil

Congrats on the nomination. I think your layout is at a most interesting stage that captures a following audience... you've got things up and running, people can see much of the grand plan (part realised, part in progress), there's significant development still ongoing and it is proceeding at a good pace to keep up the interest level. Good job! One of the more consistently interesting threads on the forum, for sure...

I do find the marketing situation with the new model of GT3 a bit odd. It was available for pre-order only, from a new manufacturer with no track record, at a time when a similar approach from another supplier had failed spectacularly. No additional models of GT3 appear to have been produced by KR for open sale, for those who would like to have more confidence in the final product before making a purchasing decision. GT3 is now hitting the model press, with multiple reviews in all the regular magazines... but nobody can actually go out and buy one off the shelf, from their usual retailers, or even from the manufacturer at this point in time. A second production run is being proposed if there is a sufficient level of interest expressed to the manufacturer, but delivery will be some time in the future and it sounds like manufacturing hasn’t even commenced yet. Whilst I can perhaps understand the manufacturers desire to test the water regarding level of interest before proceeding to production, from the customers perspective it is a very unsatisfactory way of going about things with the risk all being passed on to the consumer, and extensive market exposure completely being mis-matched with availability. I can only hope that future manufacturers opting for this approach have sufficient faith in their product to order additional quantities to meet further demand once their product is realised and all the media exposure kicks in. A missed opportunity I think, from an overly cautious supplier. I do hope that this does not become the normal way forward for RTR products in the future.

I thought the 'slip' reference was to a Petticoat. Couldn't for the life of me work out why St E. wanted to sketch that...

It’s not just Sam’s video’s, the ‘unboxing’ theme is used by several you-tubers and I usually find them very tedious. When it takes up to 15 minutes of inane waffle before the product even emerges out of the box... it just detracts from any real value in the opinions of the reviewer when they finally get there. I understand that the economic aspects of you-tubing encourage extending the content to a certain length, but it strikes me that there is a real opportunity for someone to undertake short and relevant reviews of model railway products that place the viewer’s needs for succinctness above the economic and marketing pressures inherent in the delivery format. That said, there is clearly a good deal of support for what Sam does from a certain demographic. It reminds me of the polarising views that some of Tony’s content has generated in the Modelling press, but perhaps from an opposite viewpoint?

Now corrected, thank you very much. At least St Enodoc wouldn't have any problem with its length!

Hmmm, I know the heart of this thread is about building your own turnouts... but if it's 'out of sight' and the need for functionality overrides form.... and the build prospect is too daunting..... The same template works for the Code 75 Electrofrog version SL-190. OK, RRP is £50 (less if you shop around) but it is a fall-back option, if you're not too principled!

That settles it then. I will carefully place a bus on my bridge, proudly defiant!

CONTROL I chose DCC control for a number of reasons. Firstly I had become familiar with it from operating a club layout, and through converting some of my own locomotives to run on this, all fear of the unknown was diminished. Secondly, I wanted the layout to be fully integrated, with signals, lighting, sound, turnouts etc. all working together as they should. Thirdly, the 'two wires' principle of DCC had a lot going for it, as analogue control would require individual wires for almost everything, and many of the wiring runs would need to bridge several baseboard joins. Whilst I had learned that even with DCC control, everything needs its own wiring connection into the bus, but this can be kept local to each board, with only bus wires needing to span the baseboard joins. No more wiring looms for me! I also had the benefit of trying out a number of different DCC systems with the help of different club members. I liked the Digitrax system with two independent control knobs on each handset, the NCE Procab felt good in the hand and the roller-control was intuitive, the ESU panel was superb but rather more expensive than the other systems, in the end I went with the Gaugemaster Prodigy system for no other reason than I liked it, and it was available at a reasonable price at the time. I was conscious that as time went by, I was likely to accumulate a lot of accessory decoders and that the 4 amps available from the Prodigy unit might not be powerful enough to control everything. Also, as the layout was being built, it quickly became clear what a faff it was to input every address, every time you wanted to throw a point or signal, or switch between loco's. Something more intuitive was required, with a visual means of showing how everything was set... a full control panel. In the end I decided on a DCC Concepts Alpha Control system (operating independently of the Gaugemaster unit) for the accessories. This expandable system currently controls all the points, and in time will also control the signals and lighting on the layout. The following schematic shows how things are set up at present: I have three pairs of bus wires running underneath the whole layout... so six wires. Two for the accessories, two for the up lines and two for the down lines. The up and down line buses are each protected by a Circuit Breaker (CB1 and 2 above) so that if one shorts out, the other continues to operate unaffected... both these buses share a common power source allowing seamless operation when crossing from the up to the down lines, and vice-versa. The above photo shows the Alpha Control panels in front of the layout. They are a nice slim unit, with a very nice finish. They have two buttons for each address and these are positioned one above the other. The upper button illuminates red when selected, the lower one green. I have programmed these all to operate so that the route is set either towards the operator, or away... the upper red one for away, the lower green one for towards... I have found this to be the most intuitive way to set things up. So far so good, the point control works really well this way, and leaves the Prodigy handsets free for locomotive driving only. However, I still found myself squinting at the track work so see which way each point was set, even though the Alpha Control box showed me. What it doesn't do is show how each route has been set, so I supplemented the system with an Alpha-Mimic display. This consists of a set of red/green LED's connected to an accessory unit that responds to the same digital commands as the points. Press the button to throw point one, and the LED's for number one correspondingly change colour. All you need to do is drill a hole for each LED in the appropriate location on your track diagram display, slot in the LED, plug it in to the appropriate output on the accessory unit and hey presto! I have mounted the track diagram displays on the wall behind the layout. Note that there are only two wires running down to the layout, these are simply wired into the accessory bus. The panel on the left represents the main station area, the one on the right is the MPD. Each point is numbered on the diagram to show its accessory address: the lights change colour when the point is switched. A quick scan of the track diagrams along your intended route to make sure there are no red lights, and you're good to go. In the photo below, you cans see that both the up and down lines are set for through running along the centre platforms. In time I will be installing working signals that will operate according to how the points are set. This will require a simple local installation: a signal control accessory decoder under the baseboard, wired into the accessory bus, will respond to the same address as the turnout, and throw the signal in much the same way as the control panel LED's change. That's the theory anyway... although some will additionally require interlocking, which will be another brain-teasing adventure I guess! A final staged picture whilst I am here... showing illuminated locomotive lamps and tail light on the rake of coaches. Yes, you can do this with DC control as well, but with DCC it can be very reassuring to just flash the loco lamps to check that you have selected the right loco, and it is responding to the controller!

Have you considered building an outside slip? The geometry might be better suited to your needs:

My travels took me through Bugle yesterday, and I was able to stop and take a few photo's and measurements of the road overbridge. Key measurements: Staircase height from platform to pavement on bridge: 26 steps, each 7 inches high. Road width: 2 lanes each 9ft 6 inches wide Pavement width: 4 feet. Parapet width: 15 inches. Parapet height above pavement: 4 feet. The approach road to the station was of stone setts, with a thin, old covering of tarmac in very poor repair. Photographs herewith: three steel spans with block parapets above. Apologies for the poor lighting, the sun was just about to disappear over the horizon. Note the ancient Cornish greeting graffitied under the bridge! Above two photo's: the left hand arch as viewed from the station, now used as an access road. Next three photo's: the other two arches, either side of the platform.

Strangely enough I had a similar thing happen to me a couple of weeks ago but with tender sides. I have used UHU routinely for fixing real coal in tenders without problems, until... this was a Bachmann ‘Crab’. (I only have a couple of Midland region loco’s but this will haul a through beer train from Burton-upon-Trent). The tender coal space does not have an internal hopper in this model, so the inner tender sides were exposed to the glue and duly deformed. Fortunately the resultant ‘dimples’ didn’t affect the mixed-traffic lining on the tender sides, so repair was straightforward. Lesson learned!

You have two options, firstly find a mate who has a dcc controller, or you can simply unplug the chip and fit a ‘blanking plug’ instead. “DCC ready” RTR products come with a blanking plug already fitted, that you remove when plugging in the chip. I have a box full of them! You often find that a dcc fitted product has a blanking plug in the little plastic bag of bits. There are different kinds though, the most common being either 8-pin or 21-pin.

Having worked as a volunteer at a day centre for children with special needs, I couldn’t agree more. Many children (and adults) with autism develop a fascination for railways, which is why you will often find them attending clubs and shows within our hobby. Yet these same folks are often hypersensitive to excessive sound and other stimuli, some to the point of having to wear sound cancelling headphones when out and about in public. So some layout owners fascination with loud sound presents a real problem for others, causing genuine distress. I have absolutely no qualms about reminding exhibition layout operators of this fact if it becomes necessary.

It very much depends upon which DCC control system you use. Integrated display ones like the ESU ECoS control panel are fine, but most of the handset based systems that most DCC users prefer are a real pain to use in isolation. Every command has to be dialled in separately with its own address, and on any layout larger than the most simple, it just becomes unworkable. You spend all your time peering into the corners of your layout to see which way a point is set, switching between accessory and loco control, constantly punching in the different addresses and commands. I use a separate control panel for accessories (point motors, signals etc) with a mimic track diagram and indicator panel so I can see exactly how every point and signal is set, at a glance. It is easy to see, intuitive to use, and simple to operate. DCC is no different to analogue control in terms of what you need to set up visually, if you want ease of operation. It is just so much simpler to wire in and install than analogue. Imagine an analogue-like control panel, but with just two wires between it and the layout, all the switches and motors and indicator LED’s communicating digitally down the same 2 wires rather than each having their individual connections. There was a stage in my own DCC layout construction when the track had all been laid but the control panel not yet built, where I was solely using the handset to operate everything. Needless to say, the accessory control panel very quickly became an immediate next-build priority!

A note of caution to those running DCC loco’s on DC layouts... Always make sure that any Relco’s are switched out before running, unless you like your chips fried! John New, I recommend fitting circuit breakers to each zone. Both safer and more effective that using isolating switches as when something shorts out then it doesn’t affect the other zones.

And of course the Great Western west of Plymouth. The Royal Albert Bridge and other sections on the line to Penzance, seeing long trains hauled by top link locomotives.

Seven buses on a bridge is pushing it a bit, especially for Cornwall! I think Clive May have included the parapets in his width measurements? The pavement on Bugle bridge is very narrow, only between 3-4 feet wide by my reckoning, you can only walk along it in single file and it is very scary when a 40-tonne Artic is passing you at 30mph or more. Check out Street View in google earth to see what I mean. That will also give you an idea of the parapet height too.

TRACKWORK A variety of commercial track has been used, some code 100 streamline in one corner of the layout and the off-scene carriage sidings, to take advantage of the range of curved points available. But the scenic part of the layout is all laid with code 75 bullhead track, a mixture of PECO and C&L (their thick sleeper variety). I found the C&L rail joiners to be very flimsy, so have used the excellent PECO bullhead joiners (SL-114) for both trackage systems. Woodland scenics foam underlay was used, a mixture of their flat sheets and chamfered edge roll. The track was laid on top of the foam using the fine Peco pins, gently tapped through pre-drilled holes in the sleepers to avoid bending them. Tracksetta's and a long ruler were used to achieve flowing curves and straight sections that are truly straight. I have a real dislike of track and platform edges that should be straight but are horribly wonky when viewed along their length, and am amazed how often you see this on layouts featured in the modelling press! So great care was taken to get this looking right. As DCC control is used, every section of rail has a wire dropper soldered to it, connecting to the electrical supply running underneath the baseboards. Tracklaying in progress at the station throat: flowing curves for the most part, but a couple of compromises owing to commercial paintwork geometry. The curved points are gently 'bent' PECO bullhead points, but I will replace a couple of them with custom built pointwork sometime in the future, to achieve a more consistent radius on the approach curves: Dead straight track work and platform edges in the station area. Once laid, the track work was sprayed with Humbrol matt earth paint to provide a base colour. This is C&L track, the webbing between sleepers is continuous down both rails and needs cutting for curves, but it is ideal where dead straight track is required: A simple jig was made for laying the double track running lines. One track was carefully laid, the second simply placed equidistant from it using the jig: Joining the code 75 bullhead rail to code 100 flat-bottomed rail proved to be easier than expected. Using a slitting disc, the end centimetre of code 100 rail was trimmed so that just the flat-bottom part of the rail is left. Code 75 bullhead rail is simply soldered on top of this tongue, and it is the correct height at the rail top: Timber fillets were sawn to the same profile as the track underlay, and firmly glued and pinned to the baseboard to provide a solid edge. Track was laid directly across the baseboard join, but approximately 5-6 sleepers were removed and replaced with either copper clad or DCC concepts fibreglass sleepers. These were super-glued to the wooden fillets, making everything rock-solid. The track was then soldered to the sleepers, and cut at the baseboard join using a slitting disc. Tracklaying in progress across a baseboard join: This shot shows the completed baseboard join, the timber fillet painted black to match the underlay. The sleepers were painted with Railmatch 'Sleeper Grime' and the rails using Humbrol acrylic rust colour. Just the ballasting to do now: Ballast in place, the baseboard join is visible here. I have found that with this method of baseboard join and track laying, a perfect alignment is achieved every time the boards are re-assembled, even on curved track. Woodland Scenics medium grey blend ballast is used, with washed sand from the local beach in the cess. It still needs a bit of weathering to tone it all down a bit: FOOTNOTE: I won't labour the point here, as it has been extensively covered in the thread on PECO bullhead points, but I have taken a dislike to the 'Unifrog' concept now being used by PECO, including on this code 75 bullhead range. After installation, I found that some locomotives shorted out on the unifrog due to the tight electrical gaps between the frog and adjacent rails of opposite polarity. I have overcome this by converting the points to the 'electrofrog' configuration previously used by PECO for their flat-bottomed rail products and they now perform perfectly, and look good too.

I’d suggest some alliteration for the new Retford Mob/crew. Retford rabble, reprobates, rebels, rioters, riff-raff... Quite a few options. Retford Crewe?