ISW

I'd be looking to put in a dehumidifier (or 2?), possibly instead of a heater (or at least one of them). Not only do they reduce the water vapour but also kick out a reasonable amount of heat. A win-win of sorts. I have an attic (of sorts) in my garage, but it's not for a layout, just to keep the car. I just added some cheap plywood to the rafters to create plenty of storage space. It won't take my weight, but is useful nonetheless. I just had to make sure I had 'reachable' access to all areas. Putting something 'soft' on the concrete floor is a must for me. I do some DIY in the garage and the concrete floor was a pain (pun intended). I just threw down some cardboard, and that softened it just enough, plus it soaks up any water dripping off a wet car. Ian

Thanks for the complement, but now I have rather ruining it a bit by painting. Mutter ... I've not painted 'raw' cereal packet cardboard before, having generally covered it with inkjet printed textures. The airbrush paint seems to have 'expanded' some of the stair treads, which are now a little more 'curved' than I would like. I'm leaving it to fully dry before I attempt any remedial works. My initial thoughts are to cut the stair tread at an obtuse angle, shorten one edge by a tad, and then glue a thin 'patch' over the joint. I could do this on top of the tread (as I was planning on adding a black paper overlay to mimic rubber treads) or underneath. If there are any better / easier methods I like to hear about them! Ian

Platform Staircase - Finally, some progress Yes, I know it's hard to believe but, there has finally been some progress with the platform staircase. As you will recall (if your memory is long enough ...) my first attempt ended with an assembly of 'bananas', with the cereal packet cardboard having 'curled' during the sub-assembly glue up. So, I started again. However, this time I sandwiched all the sub-assembly glue ups between lollipop sticks, clamped together to keep them straight. This worked just fine. Final assembly was, just as before, with some 'temporary scaffolding' (cardboard) in place to get the correct overall dimensions. Once the glue had dried, I started drilling holes into the staircase treads to accept the vertical poles of the handrails. I used my 'dremel' clone for this purpose: If you are wondering what the 'stains' are around each hole, then this is just thin superglue. I drizzled it on to strengthen the hole because I had to keep drilling the holes larger and larger (well, from 0.9mm to 1.5mm) to accept the hardrails. This worked really well. I could then insert the handrails into the holes, but not before drizzling more superglue on the handrails themselves to given them a bit more strength / structure. After all, they are only ~0.7mm thick cereal packet cut to a width of ~1mm: No, it wasn't easy. Getting all the holes to line up, whilst simultaneously pushing them (very carefully, with tweezers) into the holes took a fair amount of time. I was happy that the handrails were vertical! At least it's finally together, and is now being prepared for a coat of paint from the airbrush. I'll be painting the whole thing black (to cover up the cereal packet labelling) and then into crimson red. Ian

Drew, Nice photo, but is that the 'exact' design you are getting, you state that yours is 'bespoke'? The one in the photo has very long/deep windows that I'd guess you don't want. I'd be looking for windows that were 'above' the baseboard and any backscenes. Having spent all that money, I think I'd be fitting a reversible heat-pump (split air con) to provide both heating and cooling. Wouldn't need to be very large at all, but would greatly increase 'comfort' ... Ian

Down in the bottom-right, you have the Mainlines turning off the Branch lines. You be better (and more prototypical) to have the Mainlines running straight into the tunnel (to the fiddle yard), with the Branch Lines err, well, branching off. Would the Quarry benefit from a headshunt? This would let you 'shunt about' in the sidings without affecting the mainlines. You seem to have 'invented' a new junction top-right, that isn't / wasn't there. Any reason? Ian

And renumber the coaches correctly. I use my RCTS Coaching Stock book from 1974 to 'select' a number that is suitable (B1 bogies, etc). Ian

Nice video, but 2 things to beware of: The Lima B4 bogie moulding has the angled bar (?) of the secondary suspension the wrong way round. You need to turn the bogie 180-degrees to be correct. Therefore, any couplings have to be fitted on the 'naked' end of the bogie (away from the tension coupling). If you remove all of the side 'window' area, there is nothing to keep the seating moulding in position. Turn the model over, and the seating 'falls out', pushed by the weigh that then rattles about. I always leave the toilet window (and the same piece on the opposite side) as part of the roof to 'retain' the seating moulding. The added advantage of this is that it retains the 'white' appearance of the toilet window. Ian

I believe the first issue of said book was 1972 with data correct to the end of 1971. I have the 1974 second edition, from where I started coach-spotting ... Ian

Drew, I hope it doesn't come to that. The whole point of planning, planning, and more planning, is to avoid such occurrences. Printing the layout out and transferring it to the baseboards is what I did too: I then used a bodger (pin, nail, something sharp) to put holes through the paper and into the underlay to 'transfer' the alignment to the underlay. I did this at all key alignment points in curves (TS, SC, CS, ST, etc), all the turnout extremities, and then generally at ~150mm spacing. I then just 'joined the dots' to draw the alignment on the underlay. When it comes to designing the baseboards, I did mine in Xara Designer Pro X10. However, when it came to making the Upper Level baseboards, there was far more '3D' involved, with tracks going under/over each other, and Ramps to join to. To get this right I used SketchUp instead, like this: It's a great tool, and lets you 'zoom / pan' about the layout, looking underneath the baseboards checking for clearances, and measuring off all the main dimensions. There's no way I'd have been able to make the baseboards (and have them fit together!) without this drawing. Ian Ian

Try Roket 'tricky stick', see below: As you can see from the label, it is to let SuperGlue adhere to such plastics. Ian

Drew, You don't hang about do you ... You'll need to 'look' at the southern station approach to see which crossovers / turnout you need to incorporate to actually operate the layout the way you want. You don't seem to have left 'space' to achieve this? Those 4-track will have to drop several cm, plus curve round (to be going 'down' your plan) to get 'under' the main layout. This usually takes up more space than you think. It did on my layout, so make sure you have a workable 'plan' before you get too far with the main layout. Ian

Drew, This is what Google Earth shows for the station in 1999, just the 2 island platforms: But there is loads more map information at the following website: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/find/#zoom=16.0&lat=51.59789&lon=-0.12044&layers=11&b=1&z=0&point=0,0 Ian

Drew, Now I like that much better, model the place you knew as a child. That's certainly what I did, and it helped me immensely to get me to concentrate on the major 'elements' that I wanted to model, plus the trains (passenger & freight) that I wanted to run. A few comments / questions: Top-right on your plan, what happens to those 4-tracks (where, in reality, they enter a tunnel)? Is that to some storage sidings / fiddle yard? You have 4 platforms at the station, but I don't see why. The station is Alexandra Palace Station (well, that's what google earth implies ...), and there are currently just 3-platforms. However, back in 1999, there were only 2-platforms. Given you are modelling Era-7, shouldn't you be looking at the track layout from that time? Have you thought about what trains you want to run (roundy-roundy, continuously), run on the 'branch' through Bowes Park (the next station on the branch), and what you want to operate to/from the depot? This will help decide (dictate?) those elements of the track layout you need to keep. Ian

Rob, If you have a nice 1m ruler (preferably a thin one) you can use that. Weigh it down flat (clamps / bricks / ...) on to the track on one side of the vertical curve where it is a single gradient. On the other side of the vertical curve, gently press the ruler down to the rails. You 'shouldn't' have any large gaps between the underside of the ruler and the rails all the way over the vertical curve. Shine a torch behind to check for gaps. Ian

Rob, Isn't the problem more one of 'vertical alignment'? These new fangled (?) models don't seem to have 'floating' middle axles on Co-Co bogies (that they used to have on older models ...). Charlie Bishop (Chadwick Model Railway) has noted similar problems. The result being that one of the outer axles on the bogie gets 'lifted' above the railhead on any vertical curves (pivoting on the middle axle). On straight track (with gentle vertical curves) this isn't a problem, as the bogie just 'plops' back onto the rail once on level track. However, if you also have a horizontal curve then there is the risk that the bogie 'plops' down and that axle misses the railhead. Equally, if your vertical alignment is too sharp (low vertical radii) or not 'smooth' (aka has 'some' sharp vertical bits in it) this exaggerates the gap between the outer bogie axle and the railhead, leading to increased derailment risk. Since you don't actually encounter derailments (and based on your photos) the outer axle is not lifting 'too' much. This also implies your horizontal alignment must be quite good as well. Therefore, I'd be looking closely at the vertical alignment over that 'crest' in your alignment. A good set of 'railway curves' would be great for this, like this: These would quickly show up any 'imperfections' in the vertical curve over your crest, and also help you to 'smooth it out' by the strategic insertion of thin shims. However, the glued ballast may have to go first ... Ian

Paul, Intrigued, I had to look the exhibition up. The following link gives more details: https://www.ukmodelshops.co.uk/event/y2024/26465-MountTaborModels_Exhibition Ian

Actually, just chuck "robel 69.70" at your favourite search engine. That'll generate a lot of information. Ian

Try: https://www.robel.com/en/systems-vehicles/workshop-on-wheels/product/mobile-maintenance-system/ There seems to be a download. You could always try sending an Enquiry ... And there is also https://www.railjournal.com/track/network-rail-orders-robel-maintenance-vehicles/ Ian

Drew, In an effort to 'justify' my earlier recommendation to use a 'real' location, here is my Upper Level track layout (it connects to the Lower Level at Connection 1 and Connection 2a): There's no way I'd have come up with this layout! But using the actual trackplan [1] I was able to create it. [1] - I bought the 'book' "British Railways Layout Plans of the 1950s - Volume16: ex-MR lines Derby to Barnt Green", published by the Signalling Record Society Now, let's look at the junction to the south of the station platform. The mimic looks like this (concentrating on the Red & Orange Lines): You have to ask yourself, why is there a trailing crossover between the NB & SB Fasts (formed by a pair of single-slips)? It doesn't make sense, until you know there is a DMU service to/from the south terminating at Burton. It operates on the NB Fast into the platform. It then reverses through that crossover onto the SB Fast, from where it can access the Bay Platform where it waits to depart later. It all 'hangs together'. The Green Lines are for my Brewery, and are completely my invention, although the connection to the Leicester Line Junction is 'correct'. It allows for 'mainline' locos to use the Exchange Sidings only. Shunters then move the wagons to/from the NB /SB Brewery Lines. There are two Brewery 'areas' to give me the excuse to run the Brewery Lines under the mainlines, which does actually exists at this location. Then there is the Leicester Line Junction (to the left on the Track Plan). This seems to allow 'just about any movement', but the mimic actually looks like this: Note that you cannot go: from the SB Fast to the NB Leicester Line, because that'd be silly (I have the NB & SB Leicester Lines joining together, out of sight, but in reality it's a double track line). reverse NB slow to NB Fast, because why would you do that? and lots of others But that you can: have trains SB (Fast or Slow) to Leicester Line SB, plus NB Leicester Line to NB (Fast or Slow) at the same time the Brewery can access the NB Slow, but NOT the NB Fast (to reverse) Go from the MPD to any direction / Line Again, there is no way I'd have come up with this junction arrangement with it's inherent advantages (and compromises!). The railways knew what they were doing and, importantly, why they were doing it. I hope you find this informative / helpful, because you have the space to replicate a fair sized chunk of railway. Normally, I'd additionally add that you should plan, plan and do more planning before you start construction; but you're already doing that! Ian

Drew, Nah, don't like it. I've marked my thoughts up on your plan below: I really think you'd be much better choosing an actual / real location, and basing your layout on it. That's what I did, and it 'forces' you to accept real life compromises whilst providing realistic track layouts. Yes, you might have to 'simplify' the layout (I certainly did!), but it will result on a track layout that has real 'meaning' and operational reality / integrity. You'd have real trouble trying to explain some of the operational 'choices' in your layout. Ian

Fred, Euston suburban lines? By the time I was trainspotting in the early 1970s, these were all-over blue Class 501s, but take a look at https://www.derbysulzers.com/willesden.html. There are a few photos showing Class 24s on Euston Suburban services in the 1960 with suitable rolling stock. Ian

Kings Cross suburban lines? By the time I was trainspotting in the early 1970s, these were all-over blue, but; Above extracted from https://www.steve-banks.org/prototype-and-traffic/231-lner-er-suburban-traffic-king-s-cross-inner-surburban Ian

An update As I continue to 'struggle' with my platform staircase it struck me that I haven't posted any layout drawings since this topic was started many years ago. Whilst those original track layouts remain essentially correct, there have been a number of 'tweaks' in the intervening years. So here is the layout that was actually built: Note that the 'grey rectangle' to the left is the alcove to the door opening, and that to the bottom is the alcove to the only window. Upper Level: Connecting Ramp 1: Connecting Ramp 2: Lower Level:

As it says in the 'footer' of the "Submit Reply" (well, it does on a computer; not sure about phones / tablets ...): "Accepted file types: jpg, stl, png, pdf, doc, docx, xls, xlsx, dwg, dxf, obj, gif, jpeg, JPG, JPEG, ino, mp3, svg, webp, m4a, mp4" Does AnyRail export to DWG or DXF (or even SVG) as these are 'acceptable' to RMWeb. I had a similar 'problem' with an AVI file, which I had to convert to MP4 (and then reduce the resolution to keep within the 10mb filesize limit) to upload in here. Ian

Paul, I was at Doncaster Station, about a year back (err, 20th December 2019 actually!), where I ended up talking to a guy (from Norfolk?) who was modelling something 'very' similar. He'd just spent the day 'measuring up' the external wall of Doncaster Works that is adjacent to the station. Obviously, he has quite a lot of useful information about the area. Quite how he can be contacted I don't know, but maybe he reads RMWeb? Ian