ISW

I found that, with 3DPlanIt it was 'essential' to work through each of the tutorial examples step-by-step to learn the interface (yes, they are stretching the definition ...). In fact, I recall going through them twice to get to grips with the interface and program. However, it was worth it. There is a Peco Streamline (Code-100) library with the 3DPlanIt program. I used it all the time for my layout design. At least 3DPlanIt is actually 3D (I've no experience of the other programs you mention, so can't comment on their abilities), even though this is 'tenuous' at best. However, it does produce quite nice 'renders' of the layout in 3D. In addition, you can actually 'drive' a train around the layout, which I found to be quite fun & annoying in equal measures. It will also 'video capture' your driving, so here is an example [1] of me driving around part of my 2-level layout before the Upper Level was even built: Model Railway - Upper Level - Simulation-1-1.mp4 Yes yes, I know there are bits of 'flying track' and I haven't 'mastered' the art of tunnel openings, but the result is surprisingly close to reality on the actual layout! [1] - this is my fist attempt at embedding a video in an RMWeb posting, so apologies for any 'errors' Ian

Have you considered re-motoring with a CD-ROM motor? I've done quite a few of my 'older' (~1980s) Hornby & Lima locos, that has improved their running no end. You can get 'kits' for the swap or, as I did, just use DIY. In the case of Hornby you have to glue the drive cog onto the motor shaft. I just used superglue. To install the CD-ROM in the old motor 'case' you can get 'proper' fitting kits, but hot-melt glue was okay for me. Here's what an old Hornby Class 25 motor looks like after re-motoring: It's always an option. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing the steps, tricks, and pitfalls to avoid. Ian

Have you considered selling it all at a local (or national) swap-meet? Set up your own table and sell as much as you can. You might need to set up a card payment method though (like SumUp). From what a couple of sellers have told me, they got much better prices this way. You can find all the swap meets at https://www.ukmodelshops.co.uk/events/local.html What you have afterwards can go to another seller (eg: Rails of Sheffield) or through eBay. Ian

Zac, I'll have to take a look at SCARM again. I don't recall there being a free version (or, at least, one I could fully use) a few years back when I settled on 3rdPlanIt. If you look at the 'renderings' from 3rdPlanIt (below), you'll see why I thought you were using it: Ian

Try toothpaste or JIF creme surface cleaner. Both are very fine abrasives. Ian

Have you seen the 'bookazine' "HST - The Definitive Guide" from ~May 2022? It contains quite a bit of useful information. Ian

Rob, The 'trick' is to use the nearest rectangular shape, and let the scenery 'overlap' over the top of the glass to give the desired irregular shape. Understood. Mirrors aren't going to cut it there. If it helps, there are plenty of YouTube videos of woodworking experts using 2-part clear epoxy resins (usually a marine type) to 'infill' wood or between lumps of wood. They use it to create nice flat work surfaces in 'knarly' wood or to infill irregular shapes for wood turning (on a lathe). They show the 'tricks' they use, particularly how to avoid 'bubbles' on the surface of the poured epoxy (waft over it with a hot flame). Ian

Rob, In which case, just use a thin sheet of mirror. If that's 'too' reflective, then a thin sheet of glass with the back painted black will also work. I've seen the same 'trick' used by Andrew Peters in depots to create puddles. Ian

Looking at that track layout plan, I get 'vibes' of Manchester Piccadilly (with the pair of through platforms) or Kings Cross when the 'widened lines' trains passed through. Nice visualisations / renders. Are you using 3rdPlanIt by chance? Ian

Jack, Thanks for the information. Although I've never encountered the issue, it's good to know that it is there and is to be watched out for. Ian

Richard, One way to find 'details' is to look at existing RTR products, such as ScaleScenes or Bachmann. These often provide 'sufficient' information for a building. For example, this is the information I found on their website (or it might have been a Seller's website) for the ScaleScenes goods shed: With just this information, and their own product photos, I was able to 'draw it up' in a drawing package (Xara Designer Pro X10, if you're interested). I was then able to 'make' my own version of the good shed, as below: Yes, I know it's made from cardboard, thick paper, and inkjet printouts, but the principle is there and I see no reason why it couldn't be used to create 3D prints. Ian

Surely you plan to make the platform buildings (and canopy) removeable? I use the method to 'recess' all the buildings into the platform surface as this makes the join 'vertical' instead of 'horizontal', and is tends to be much less visible. It has the useful side effect of ensuring consistent location of the building. Here's a photo showing part of a platform recess: And this is with the building plonked into place: You can also see the 'recess' outline on the overbridge with the same purpose. Ian

Roger, I'd drill be merest 'hint' of a hole at the surface, maybe the same depth as the diameter. That'll give the 'impression' of a hole without being 'destructive' of the model. Just make sure you are centred ... Ian

Jack, That's why I always 'resize' any photos before uploading to RMWeb. I keep the 'full-size' version at home. I resize down such that the larger dimension becomes 1080 pixels (in your case the height). Actually, anything over 720 pixels is probably perfectly okay for viewing in RMWeb. This reduces a 3280x1476 mobile phone photo (~2mb) down to 2400x1080 (400kb), meaning I can upload more photos in a single posting without RMWeb 'complaining'. Ian

As you sure that's a good idea? I know that 00-gauge ballast is oversized (which is why I use N-gauge ballast on my 00-scale layout) and smaller sizes would be better, but the incorporation of 'dust' into the ballast will just make it set even harder. Unless, of course, you are sieving it before reuse? Ian

This'll probably do it: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/382950845123 It definitely works on hard perspex as I used it to glue the drawers in a freezer. Ian

Strangely it's probably easier to buy a Lima or Mainline Mk1 or Mk2 in blue/grey. I picked up a Lima Mk1 SK from Rails of Sheffield pre-owned January sale. Yes, they need some work to 'improve' their appearance but that's what modelling is for. Ian

Platform Staircase - 2 steps forward, 1 back Way back at the beginning of December last year, my Cricut cutter had cut out all the elements for the Platform Staircase. Well, I 'finally' got around to assembling the bits together. Yes, there's been a lot of intervening interruptions, and that's without counting Christmas and New Year. This didn't go too well, unfortunately. Whilst the parts 'are' the correct size, getting them to assemble millimetre perfect just wasn't achieved. Add to that the horrible tendency for cardboard (cereal packet) to 'curl up' when left for long periods and you get a bit of a disaster. This is what it looks like currently. I didn't bother installing the handrails ... What may not be obvious from the photos, is that the middle 'spine' of the staircase is like a banana, and is ~5mm off-line at the top! Oops. The marked centreline isn't in the middle either! There is a lot of temporary 'scaffolding' under the staircase that I had to add to give me something to build from, and to ensure it was the correct height when completed. The plan is to remove it all just before final installation, but that's a way off now. I am tempted to do some 'testing' of how to install the handrails, so at least I can get that bit right next time. Then, this example will be scrapped, and it will be onto Mark 2 ... Ian

I was in a similar position when I started my layout. I decided to go with Megapoints Controllers (just a customer) having been impressed with the simplicity of the system. With Megapoints Controllers that'd be 2x 12-servo controller boards + 1x 4-servo controller boards (assuming a 'favourable' grouping of the turnouts to ease wiring lengths). You can control the turnouts from using the servo boards, or have the whole lot controlled from a MultiPanel board (which is what I did - In fact I ended up with 3x MultiPanels, as I have ~90-turnouts). It 'can' be quite simple. This is what I use to provide 'power' to the turnouts. Each little veroboard is for 2-turnouts (aka a crossover!): The servos themselves I bought off TheBay. Back then, in 2020, they cost less than £2 each. These are then mounted in an aluminium channel (B&Q ...) using the method originally recommended by Megapoints Controllers (they now sell their own little bracket, but it costs more). The microswitches (~20pence) came from Switch Electronics (who are also on TheBay as LED essential): When assembled, they look like this: Once it's all installed under a baseboard, it looks something like this, which I think is quite tidy and doesn't use 'too many' wires, thanks to the Megapoints boards (if you want any addition descriptions, let me know): Hope this helps. I'm sure there are plenty of other ways to achieve the same outcome (eg: MERG has similar equipment), but this should indicate how 'simple' it actually can be. Yes, it looks complicated in that last photo, but it's just a lot of the same simple elements. Ian

Darius, Is the 'yellow line' (First Class of course ...) painted or a transfer. Either way, it does looks very good. Ian

That does sound most interesting ... I hope it works, so be careful to avoid any annoying 'reflections' on the acetate. Ian

I had the same issue with my layout of Burton-on-Trent. I am modelling the 1883 (aka pre 1972) station building and the south Bay Platform, but I had to use the later 'simplified' track layout at the Leicester Line Junction due to space constrains. The original one was masterful, but would have increased the profits of Peco by a significant amount! I don't even want to think about the signalling ... Here's what it 'should' have looked like: And here's what I actually built: At least it 'functions' correctly. Ian

Ballast was one of the few things I didn't 'skimp' on. I mostly used Woodland Scenics 'fine' ballast, which is actually very lightweight. However, I did pick up a few additional bags of 'proper' stone ballast at a Swap Meet; much heavier. I then made up my own 'recipes' mixing 2 colours of ballast at a time, and threw (literally) some 'contrasting' ballast over the top in places to add variety. Ian

I thought I'd include a few more 'reference photos' for you that I took in the summer of 1979: North End: Mid-Platform on a rather busy Sunday! The Class 31s 31423+31419 was on a Folkstone to Oakhampton special: I have plenty more, if you need anything specific. Ian

Many thanks for the compliments but, in my mind, there are loads of others on this forum who are better or just as good. Each one has his her them it their own strengths and weaknesses. Yes, I try to plan, plan, & more plan, but's that's simply because I hate redoing anything. So, I plan to ensure I get it right first time (err, most of the time). All that is a result of me spending my career on large (multi-year) railway projects, where such things are 'normal'. However, I do have (many) weaknesses. My painting skills are very poor, and I'm just not that 'arty', meaning that I really haven't got around to any proper scenics as yet. I note from your layout that you are way better in that regard. When I started the layout design, in my minds eye I had tail-chaser trains running most of the time. Meanwhile I'd be able to 'play trains' in the MPD and Brewery areas, plus adding in a few freights. That was the main reason for the long train circuit (on 2-levels). Those would come by sufficiently infrequently for me to be able to do my own little shunting on/off the mainlines. I've found the tail-chasers to be quite reliable, but not infallible. There's still some 'work' required to keep them from the occasional derailment and (more importantly, with 2.5% gradients) uncoupling. Ian