Jump to content
 

Methuselah

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    303

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Methuselah

  1. Methuselah

    15. Worth The Effort....?

    By Methuselah,


    Tractive Effort. Testing. Adhesion. Weight.
    Tractive Effort......in practical terms.
     
    I have searched the forums here for an existing thread on Tractive Effort, and other than some mentions in other threads have not found one on this specific subject.
     
    The 4mm scale, OO gauge diorama that I'm building necessitates gradients down to and UP from a lower storage level - or else I wouldn't be writing this. As a corollary of deciding what maximum gradient to allow, it follows that some sort of assessment of what it takes to pull a train - and what the locos are capable of - naturally follows, to ensure that I don't create a massive problem for myself.....
     
    I should say from the outset, that this is purely a practical, empirical exercise - so no formulae, calculators or slide rules allowed....! This is not an engineering dissertation - it's simply a practical exercise. I am starting - no pun intended, from the premise that no run-up is allowed, and that a start from stationary must be made - either on the level - or at two pre-set gradients. Having picked-over whatever I can find on the internet, two approximate benchmark gradients seemed to stand-out. Firstly, that serious problems started to occur at steeper than 1:50/2%, and that few problems seemed to occur at 1:100/1% or shallower. Whether this assumption is any good will be put to the test in a later series of tests. Thus the Loco Tests will be at;-
     
    1) LEVEL.
    2) 1:50.
    3) 1:100.
     
    For simplicity the track will be standard Peco Code 100 (As that's what will be laid on the hidden gradients anyway.). The track will be cleaned after every test. Tests indoors at room temperature.
     
    Bearing in mind that the aim is to test what the locos can START - only the maximum drawbar force is being measured. In practice, all the locos ended-up slipping - so this is ignored. Only the MAXIMUM force is relevant. Interestingly, the maximimum TE recorded is always AFTER the loco begins to slip, though the difference between just before and after it starts to slip is small. This may be at variance with 1:1 loco performance - but I'm merely reporting what happens in this model test scenario.
    As a matter of interest - all tests were carried-out with the locos running FORWARDS. A comparison between the loco's PUSHING & PULLING was made - and the results were identical. (The Test Gauge will measure both tension and compression.).
     
    A Digital Force Gauge was used, with a range of 0 - 20N. (2.039432426Kg). In practice, thus far, the sample batch of locos have struggled to get to 1.00N, so for the sake of simplicity, all results will be given in Newtons. A simple free online converter can be found here ;- 
    https://www.unitconverters.net/force/newtons-to-kg.htm
     
    Bearing in mind the simple, empirical nature of these tests, it's worth underlining it's simply not relevant to start discussing the power of the locos - it matters not. In fact, there are a host of variables aside from the power of the motor, such as number of wheels, type of metal the wheels are made from, weight etc etc. All these peripheral factors are ignored - only what is delivered to the drawbar matters.
     
    The plan is to carry out three series of tests ;-
     
    1) Test some locos.
    2) Test some sample scale-length trains - to see what it takes to start them, as per the locos on the Level, 1:50 & 1:100.
    3) Test to confirm whether the T.E. of locos in (1) is actually enough to start trains of that rolling resistance (2) or less. (I'm                deliberately ignoring the fact that weigh, is technically separate, as it adds to the rolling resistance - it's just simpler.).
    4) Test the efficacy of adding weight to locos.
     
    This won't all happen at once, but from time to time, as I get the time.
     
    I have a lot of locos and they are a mixture of kitbuilt, scratchbuilt and RTR. In the case of RTR - assume they are standard unless any mod's are specifically mentioned.
    Below is an initial test of a totally random box of locos. The results give a taste of what can be expected as more locos are tested. Of course, individual examples of a model will vary, but even in this small sample, a pattern is starting to emerge, and, not surprisingly, weight is a noticeable factor. The range here is from 0.35Nm up to a nice round 1.00 Nm. My guess is that, the likes of Garratts aside, few UK steam-profile locos are going to have a drawbar force above much above 1.00Nm.
    (Older diesel-profile models may not be much better, but obviously, more modern examples have both bogies powered, so would give much better results - but as I have none - it's a moot point.)
     
    Kernow GWR SRM   *                               4-4         RTR.      0.22Nm.
    MR 4P Compound.                                   4-4-0.     SB**.    0.35Nm.
    Jin brass GWR4500. (Compensated.)    2-6-2T    RTR.      0.37Nm.
    Bachmann GWR 4575.                            2-6-2T    RTR.      0.44Nm.
    SECR Wainright C-Class.                          0-6-0.     SB**.    0.51Nm.
    Bachmann N-Class.                                  2-6-0.     RTR.      0.58Nm.
    Brass LNWR G2                                         0-8-0.     Kit.        0.70Nm.
    Hornby BR 8P                                            4-6-2.     RTR.      0.75Nm.
    Hornby West Country                              4-6-2.     RTR.      0.77Nm.
    Bachmann LNWR G2A                             0-8-0      RTR.      0.86Nm.
    H'Dublo 8F.                                               2-8-0.      RTR.      0.88Nm.
    H'Dublo Coronation 7P/8P                     4-6-2.      RTR.     1.00Nm.
     
    (**SB=Scratchbuilt.)
     
        Interestingly, The HD 7P/8P Coronation was a bit of a reluctant runner, but it came-out well ahead. Both this and the HD 8F are notably heavy. The centre wheelsets are flangeless, and I'm not even sure they actually touch the rails......so these two might even be operating as 4-4-2's.....
        I will also be adding a column for loco weight - excluding tender. I was tempted to break this down further to ascribe the weight per driven wheel. This is not really practical, however, because many locos have flangeless wheels and hardly any are compensated/sprung, so this would very much muddy the waters and complicate what is intended to be a fairly straightforward survey of what locos can pull - and what is needed to pull realistic length trains.
     
        Finally - remember this is really all just empirical observation - not science. Theoretical formulas have no place here - only actual results.... I shall return to this when I have got some more results
     
    * PS;- I have added the newly-arrived Kernow GWR Steam Railmotor just out of interest. However, mine is a DCC version running on DC for the test. In this mode, it is pre-programmed with s soft-start/weigh & inertia simulation. When it started to slip, it kept 're-booting', so the small 0.22Nm may not  quite be it's best performance. I got the impession that it needed more weight over the power-bogie, but since these models are not really likely to have to pull much - it won't be a problem for most users. In my case though, again, the gradients will be a factor.
     
    PPS ;- I still havent found my digital scales, but will add all the weights as soon as I do.
     
  2. Methuselah

    14. How Long.....?

    By Methuselah,


    Tenbury Woofferton Scratch-built returning-modeller
    I can't believe that it's two and a half years since I last scribbled here. So what's happened in the intervening time...? Bluntly - not enough....! Sure, there are more boxes of 'stuff' collecting dust in the loft of the barn, but, since I've still not finished renovating the house, the 'train shed' itself is still, perforce, down the list of priorities. Perhaps later this year will see it happen - but, no shed - no railway....😐😐😬
     
         My time being in such short supply, I did commission someone to start on the scratchbuilt buildings, which have turned out very well, but did require a lot of specially-made windows of course. These will, in total, include Tenbury, Easton Court and Woofferton stations etc. Thus all the lineside buildings will be faithful, and I doubt that many original non-railway buildings will be included, as the line side fields were mostly empty of buildings. Although my own house is outside the footprint of the railway, I will, in an abundance of vanity, sneak it in, having spent over a decade renovating it.
     
         I did even manage to get along the Warley show at the NEC last autumn. A vastly bigger show than the Warley shows of my youth, but rather a mixed bag, and I came away somewhat underwhelmed. Will I bother again this year...? I very much doubt it. I could leave it another fifty years and have my ashes wheeled around in an funerary urn on a trolley I suppose...!
         Surprisingly, I didn't purchase any new locos at the show, just a few discounted wagons and transfers, but having seen the Kernow Models GWR Steam Railmotor running with sound and lights - I subsequently decided to order one a few days later, and we are promised these over this summer - hopefully. This model is available in all liveries, and the earliest, the full Edwardian chocolate & cream, looked and sounded very nice and was my choice. If I'd have built one, I simply couldn't have gained any sort of advantage - especially in terms of finish.
     
         This delayed start to the actual physical build of the diorama of Woofferton Junction etc does at least have the advantage of allowing my old and addled brain to soak-up more information, and to some extent ameliorate the gap of five decades away from model railways. 
         I never cease to be amazed and humbled by the sheer excellence of some of the output of modellers, both of kits, scratchbuilt, and in terms of scenery/dioramas etc. I'm acutely conscious that I need to ensure that all the niggles/annoyances that I see in lesser creations must not appear in my own efforts. However, I realise this will prove very difficult....!
         Certainly, the output of certain modellers - some well-known, some not, have proven to be very inspirational, and I do return to looking at their works regularly as inspiration.
     
         All of the infrastructure on my diorama will be set for the Edwardian period. Fortunately, hardly anything ever changed, apart from some minor signalling upgrades. Locos and stock aside, I am hoping to have various swappable elements such as figures and road vehicles, so as to better portray the key periods between 1900 and the curse of Nationalisation.
     
         I'm still rather daunted by DCC, not because I don't understand it, but it's the potential cost of equipping a lot of locos. I have some ideas for how to tackle this thorny issue, but that will have to wait until I have something runnable.
     
         Attached are images of the majority of the railway buildings for Tenbury, with only the two signal cabins awaiting windows to complete, and to be clear, these wonderful structures are the work of a friend - not my own hands. We had drawings for only some of these structures, for the rest, we have to size the buildings from large-scale O.S. maps and interpret photographs.
         As will be seen, these structures have followed the methodology used by the experts at Pendon, where the buildings plug-in to the scenery. This gives the huge advantage of avoiding the dreaded 'hovering-building disease' - the ruination of many an otherwise excellent diorama.
     
         Onwards & upwards...!
     
     














  3. Methuselah

    13. Lucky For Some.

    By Methuselah,


    Blog.
    I've deferred writing another blog in the hope that I might have some real progress to report. Sadly, apart from the usual trickle of purchases, I'm still unable to get onto building the railway room owing to other commitments.
     
    The following may end-up being filed under 'Daft Ideas', but then again.......
        
        I was recently corresponding with another modeller, seeking to expand my knowledge  - and the subject of DC/DCC entered the dialogue. Now, even not having run DCC trains myself, I can see their obvious manyfold advantages - especially if we include sound etc - which really appeals to me. Model railways are, to me at least, an animated diorama, so anything that helps animate and bring the scene to life is a 'Good Thing', be that sound, smoke lights, movement or whatever. However, the 'elephant in the room' is clearly cost. The problem for me isn't the cost of the static components - I've managed to collect quite a lot very much on the cheap, secondhand. The problem is the chips/decoders - call them what you will.
     
        If one has a few locos, them £10 per loco for a basic chip really isn't going to break the bank. However - if you have a lot of locos, then the cost is substantial - prohibitive even. I've got quite a few locos - so this really is an issue for me.
         If we look at the cheapest sound decoders (Hornby TTS.), these seem to run out at around £35. The proper sound chips are over £100.
     
        Now let's say you have fifty locos - and many folk do....;-
     
    DC     =        £0.00
    DCC  =     £500.00
    DCCS = £1,750.00  (Hornby TTS.)
    DCCS = £5,000.00
     
        Clearly, if the number of locos is large it really does get eye-wateringly expensive........and if sound-chipped - stratospherically so....! You have two hundred locos...? That'll be £20,000.00 extra please sir....! Yikes....
        
        Obviously, if you have quite a few locos, some sort of rational compromise is required. A local club has their trackwork switchable between DC and DCC - and this seems a thoroughly excellent idea for starters - and I'm pretty sure I will use this great idea to maximise flexibility. My corespondent also pointed out the great advantage that friends visiting who wish to run non-DCC locos can still do do with a system that is switchable. I'm sold on the idea already...!
     
        If one wants to stay with all DCC, there may be other, additional solutions - some of which may seem a bit odd.....but bear with me...
     
        One solution would be to have mounting for the chip and speaker in the lead train vehicle with a removable roof. That vehicle could also pick-up the power and feed the loco motor via the chip. Locos and chips could be swapped at will. This might work very well for me, since I will have permanent rakes of vehicles marshalled in storage sidings and have no interest whatsoever in shunting - only running the trains. I will always have less trains than locos, so this seems to make sense..... This idea also offers the ability to also use much better, larger speakers too. The locos would need to be only very slightly modified with a fly-lead/plug-socket underneath for quick interchangeability. The loco's feed from the wheels would have to be cut and a miniature plug and socket fitted. There would be a lead under the tender with a plug hidden underneath for the coach/van hook-up. In principle, to go from DC to DCC would then only require the swapping of the plug from the loco's own pick-ups to the fly-lead under the tender.
    Cost;- Pennies.
    Difficulty level;- Very low.
     
         This system might also make it easier to use DCC with some older models - and 'visiting locos', equipped with the same plug, could be switched from DC to DCC in literally seconds....
     
        In my case  - I will only have a limited number of trains, but many more locos, so this option might make sense. That lead DCC coach could also be put on other trains in a jiffy too  - even further expanding the availability of DCC-running, but without needing a chip for every train even. Anyway - I'm estimating I'll end up with around three locos for every train available. If I only need one decoder for every three trains, that's around a 66% saving. Sure  - not every sound chip is perfect for every other loco - but you get the drift.... 
        Yet another advantage of this system would be that you could have sound for a small or awkward loco - especially tank engines - that simply have little or no room to fit full sound.
     
        Perhaps the obvious question is - has anyone already done this - and if  not - why not....? Knowing the vast breadth of knowledge and experience on RM-Web - I'm sure someone will have the answer...
     
         Feedback appreciated - positive or negative.
     
     
  4. Methuselah
    12;- …..But I Digress.
     
         These are, it has to be said, strange days – and given that fact, it will perhaps not seem so unusual to write a blog about a model railway project that I have not even seriously physically started on – aside from collecting a mountain of material and parts etc. Also, given the interest/kind words relating to the reasons for my delay in starting, I thought it might be of some little interest to describe the larger project surrounding my little model railway project, and thereby flesh-out my pathetic excuses for the delay….! If Restoring mediaeval houses and creating an off-grid Shangri La are of no interest - look away now....!
     
         Ten years ago, a domestic collapse left me looking for a new home. This was problematic for me on many levels, not the least of which was the fact that I was left with, literally, three lorry-loads of blokey ‘stuff’. In many ways, I was really looking for a workshop – with a house attached…..I didn't need a big house, I didn't want a big house, but I did need lots of storage. Added to this, I’ve always wanted to create an eco-friendly off-grid utopia.
     
         I’d also really always hankered-after a very old timber-framed building, but they were either unsuitable, too small, too large – or too expensive. I had carried out an extensive refurbishment of a two hundred and fifty year old country house some years ago – and thought that one such project in a lifetime was enough, I was very reluctant to get involved in another – even bigger project in my dotage and decrepitude. This was all happening at a time when my very elderly parents were at the end of their lives too, with all that that also entails.
     
         After some research, my attention focussed on a German design-standard known as Passive House. (More at the Links below.).
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house
    https://passivehouse.com
    https://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/what_is_passivhaus.php
     
      This is not a specific design of house – but a set of standards to create an eco-friendly dwelling that basically needs little or no heating. I’d done some sketches of my own to create a passive house, but in a local vernacular style. So far so good. My intention was never to follow the Passive House word for word - after all, it was conceived for new buildings, not one around over half a millennia old. As they say in Hollywood, my version 'Was inspired by...'....!
     
        The next step was to look for a building plot, and here my plans started to run aground. Such building plots as there were, were often in unsuitable locations, hideously expensive, and in fact, it was sometimes more cost-effective to buy a property and demolish it. Madness.
        At around this time, I happened upon a very old, very dilapidated farmhouse. It was in many ways very well located. It was private, well away from traffic, had great views, plenty of outbuildings and even a well. The farmer had sold the house to a chap who had carried out some renovations – and then run out of money.  A cautionary tale perhaps….!
         I formed the basic idea that that I could combine my desire for an eco-friendly house with my longing for a really old building – if I could swing it….. Negotiations ground to a halt, as the seller was in default and the bank wouldn’t budge. I’d given-up and moved-on to looking at other properties.
        Then – over a year later, the agents re-approached me and asked if I was still interested. After the usual delays, I acquired the property.
     
                It’s perhaps worth pointing-out at this juncture, that many people would have looked askance at this project. It was – and is still - approached down a rough track, and through a farm populated with rusty decrepit agricultural machinery and collected junk. The average wife would not allow their husband to get halfway down the track before calling for a ‘Swift Exit’….! Oddly enough, this worked to my advantage, as it put-off many prospective buyers, and generally helps to discourage unwelcome visitors. If, like me, you are an old curmudgeon, you will understand…!
     
                At this point, whilst the roof had been re-done and felted etc, there were still a couple of broken purlins.  Some of the Oak timber-framed walls had been replaced, mainly to the front south-west facing elevation, and all of the brick infill-panels had been removed from the timber-frame and replaced with board and insulation and lime-rendered. Some of the windows were missing, and the rest all needed replacement anyway. There was no bathroom and no kitchen and no heating. The water supply had been expropriated by the farmer, but there was at least mains power to the fuse board, although the wiring was unusable. All the plumbing had also been ripped-out. There was also no access-drive directly onto the curtilage of the property. These would be just some of the issues to be dealt with.
                The previous owner had obtained all the necessary permissions to work on the property, which included extending the habitable part of the property into the agricultural buildings. I had no need of such grandiose statements – but did need those workshops and storage for my vast collection of ‘stuff’. I’d already had to move it twice, so this HAD to be the last move. This would be the third time I’d move it all – and the last. I couldn’t even use my forklift truck as the ground was far too soft.
    This is how the house looked in 2012 – in fact, externally, it doesn’t look much different today, as most of the work is either around the back, inside – or buried…!
     
    1)    
    (The derelict shell before work started. It's saving grace was a refurbished roof. Despite it;s great age, the building was amazingly dry - unlike so many others that I viewed.).
     
         One of the first big jobs was to put-in a decent drive, and a pond was excavated at the same time. Sadly, despite careful endeavours to line the pond with clay, if will still not hold water for any period, so it will need a liner in due course.
     
    2)

     
    3)

    (The ground-works contractor looks pleased with himself as the first water - pumped-up from the well courses into the pond. Despite our best efforts and the ground being clay, it has consistently failed to hold water - hey ho...!).
     
    4)

     
         Whilst we had the smaller 360 excavator on site, I was able to take action on a story that, about 18" under the front lawn was a complete mediaeval cobbled yard. This snippet had been passed to the old farmer by his grandfather - so he'd never seen it himself. We dug a test pit - and yes - it seemed to be there. 'Duggie' the dumper was put to work with the 360, and lo, this interesting relic appeared from under many tons of soil...!
     
    5)

     
         Attention also turned to the rear external wall of the house. Parts of this were in a poor state, one section rotted-away at the bottom and dangling from the structure above. Here are a few illustrations, showing the renovation of the rear wall creeping along, rotten wood and masonry being replaced with new, or occasionally even re-used sections of Oak. Old timbers can look great, but after half a millennia or more, the hardness of the Oak is unbelievable. Some of it is very dark – and very dense. It’s like iron, wrecks your tools and breaks your back. Then again, all of it emanates such an amazing fragrance when it’s being worked. If only I could bottle it…!!!
     
    6)

     (The ochre-coloured panels here are original wattle and daub that has, amazingly, survived. This image is from the first phase of timber-frame renewal at the back, so 2013. Most of the rest is done now too.).
     
    7)

     
     
     
         Unless these sorts of old buildings are lucky enough to have a decent masonry footing with a slate DPC – which is very, very rare, then this sort of rot – even of English Oak, will occur over time. Unlike the other sides of the building, a little of the ground-floor timber-frame was still in place across the rear elevation. As much was saved as possible, new footings dug and concreted and new sections of English Oak placed onto reclaimed masonry from on site, with a slate DPC. Renewing the timber-frame on this rear-section has taken place piecemeal over a number of years.
         Such repairs are quick to say, but apart from the eye-watering cost of all the – literally tons of Oak, the material is hard to work, blunts all of your tools, and is generally so heavy, it’s very difficult to work alone when assembling. Just as they were originally, joints are pegged with slightly tapered Oak pegs. 
        One of the problem when repairing is that, unlike when originally assembled, where everything could be put-up like some sort of Airfix kit, when repairing, you can’t disassemble the whole house….this means that some pretty ingenious methods need to be used to restore integrity to the structure. Another issue is that, at the same time, in order to save original structure, a certain amount of ingenuity must be utilised. This might mean hidden joints, or, when necessary, steel straps or even weldments in order to allow the building to function for many more centuries.
     
    8)

    (This steel weldment is a brace and anchor for a transverse tensioning tie-rod. One of the plat plates behind was fitted outside, and the whole structure bolted into place. Most of this is now hidden inside the thickly insulated walls.).
     
    3)
         As I mentioned at the outset, very old buildings are pretty-much guaranteed to spring a few surprises on you. When we looked at the bathroom floor it was lower in one corner, owing to some local settlement. Finding the joists loose, we started to pack the whole floor back to level, only to discover that neither the joists nor the floor were really good enough to support the weigh of the usual offices of such a room, and also including a spa. We removed the whole floor, and replaced most of the joists and all of the floorboards in English Oak.
     
    9)

     
         Weathering and structural issues are of primary concern. Neglect these – and your little off-grid utopia is soon going to descend into an expensive disaster. New over-sized gutters were fitted throughout.
         Here, it might be worth explaining a common problem with old timber buildings. Modern buildings have no flexibility designed into them. They are built on concrete footings or a concrete raft, and none of this is intended to move – ever.
         Old buildings very rarely had any real footings. If there was little soil, and the masonry could be laid onto bedrock, great – but this is very rarely the case. More usually, a bit of a trench was dug down into the earth, and if you are fortunate, you may find good, solid, dry, compact clay. Then they would assemble a footing of stone or, later, brick masonry with lime mortar – another dying art – but we’ll leave that for another time…. 
          Now, as the ground drys and wets, there is a certain amount of inevitable movement. Old timber-framed buildings always tend to move – or ‘breathe’ as the seasons pass. The joints and the flexibility of the wood can absorb a certain amount of such movement – within limits. We have all seem, and often admired old such buildings, where the upper stories cant outwards. There are two reasons for this. The immediate reason is the weight of the roof causing the purlins to bow downwards over time. As the purlins sag, that flattening triangle that forms the roof is forced outwards at the eaves, causing that characteristic angle. In the worst cases, usually where extreme neglect has allowed water or damp into the structure, and/or not attempt has been made to arrest such structural movement, timbers or joints can fail – and the whole structure can collapse.
         When we were working in and investigating the loft area, we were somewhat surprised to find a large amount of very very old straw. Clearly, the roof had been thatched originally – which brings us neatly to the cause of many such roof deformations, which it the greatly added load on the roof when thatch was replaced with clay tiles weighing many many tons more than the straw etc. Thatch was commonly used all over the British Isles during the Mediaeval Warm Period. Later, then colder wetter weather prevailed, plain clay tiles were developed to replace the thatch.).
         To arrest this deformation of the roof, I adopted a number of strategies. Thick, very robust plywood gussets were added to all of the ridge junctions of the rafters. Steel strengtheners were added where the wallplates were scarf-jointed, and a new, replacement bracing-rod was made, with a proper tensioner, as well as weldments at the eaves in the largest and oldest centre-section of the building. In fact, at the front upstairs, a whole warren-girder was welded-up to brace the front centre-section upper-storey and bolted in place. Most of this steelwork is now invisible, save for a few boltheads.
                Some steel weldments were also necessary to the areas around the ends of some of the purlins. One purlin that was broken had been replaced many years ago by a new one, of insufficient size, and the broken original left in place. This will need to be replaced in due course. However, craning-in such a very large, very heavy Oak beam is no small feat, especially as the current overhead power feed is just outside. After the overhead mains feed has been replaced by an underground feed, then the purlin-replacement can be carried out. Next year perhaps.
     
    Windows & Doors;-
     
                New windows in English Oak are commissioned in batches as required. They are similar, but of course, each unit is bespoke to fit into the ancient timber-frame. The house has quite wide eaves, and together with the oversized gutter fitted now, quite a bit of weather-protection to the windows is afforded.
     
    10)

     
               Doors are original where possible. Some of the new doors are perhaps overkill to modern eyes, but perfectly in line with the original structure and period vernacular practices. The new front door is temporarily sited, until the new porch is built. It’s very large and about 2” thick. I don’t know what it actually weighs – but it took four men to carry it…. The frame took three men to carry it.
     
    11)

     
                The ironmongery for the doors and windows is a mixture of original, old stuff I’ve collected over the years, and hand-made. When working on the from hallway, I discovered, hidden under some later crap, most of a very old mediaeval doorframe. This was restored, and a new door, very similar to the front door was made. Both door are made from two layers of English Oak planks, the face-side being vertical, and the reverse-side being horizontal. Both door have four heavy hinges – and they need them too…!
                I had assumed to unusual raised & fielded door to the solar/main bedroom, was some sort of DIY-shop cheapie. However, on closer inspection, this turned-out to be probably the oldest ‘original’ door left in the building.
     
         OK, so let’s now move on to the ‘Off Grid Utopia’ part…..
     
    Water Supply.
     
         Although the property was connected to the water main, after purchase, it transpired that the old farmer had cannily carried on paying the bill and using the water on the rest of the farm. A new main had been already put up the lane, but when I asked for what I thought would be a simple connection and meter, the water-board tried to say that despite having been on the Main before, and the house having been there for six-hundred years, they wanted to charge as for a new-build…. This amounted to many thousands of pounds. I decided that I was having none of this BS, and besides, I knew I could have plenty of better water…and FREE to boot…..but….how….?
         Although I did do some research, the system I’ve crated is largely of my own design. The primary source of water is rainwater from the gutters. The property has a lot of roof area, so when it’s raining, the collected water amounts to a minor torrent. All of the gutters output from the extensive roofs is directed down to the site of the infamous tank – the one that will sit under the ‘train-shed’. From here, water will be pumped up to a large one-ton header tank in the roof of the main loft over the cider mill. The pump will operate automatically. If it rains too much, the excess water goes via an overflow into the pond. If there is a drought, them there is also a submerged pump in the well. This allows the main u/g tank to be automatically replenished. Sensors will do all the detection and switching automatically. Operation should be seamless.
         Coming off the main header tank, water flow is by gravity, through manifolds to three different levels of filtration. 1;- Basic filtration for toilet flush water. 2;- Normal filtration for washing etc. 3;- Full filtration for Potable Drinking Water. Duplicate filters in parallel allow uninterrupted supply when changing-over filters.
     
    Drainage;-
     
         Amazingly, the original septic tanks are excellent. These have been upgraded with replacement supply pipes.
     
    Power;-
     
         This will be from extensive solar arrays, feeding back to a bank of storage batteries. I’m too overcommitted to do this at the moment, but it should happen next year, or perhaps the year after. In the summer, there should be no problem generating 100% of the electrical power required. Winter is another matter – even with a very generous array.
     
    Heating etc;-
     
         A ‘heat store’ is being fitted. These are basically just a very well-insulated hot-water tank, but fitted with extra heat-exchanger-coils. A large oil-fired boiler has been waiting to be fitted. Ultimately, this is only intended as an emergency back-up, but, until the full off-grid electrical system is up and running this will be the primary heat-source.
         For now, the boiler will heat the water in the Heat Store, and this will, via the heat-exchangers, heat the radiators and house domestic Hot Water, with an Immersion Heater as a back-up for summer use. Given the pretty insane amount of very expensive insulation, it really shouldn’t take a lot to heat the building. Interestingly, even with no heating currently, once warm, it stays warm for ages….. Very promising…..!
         All rooms will have at least one radiator, but overall, probably smaller and less in total area than would be normally expected for the size of building.
    Once the off-grid electrical supply is fully operational, the winter heating should come from the batteries. This should be possible when there is good light, if not, then the oil-fired boiler is there as a stand-by if required.
         There will also be a number or woodburners and open fires. It is not envisaged that these will need to be relied upon, however, apart from being very nice for special occasions, they do also provide an alternative heat source in extremis (More anon..!) .
     
    12)

     
    (This Inglenook is in the oldest centre-section of the house, and, as you can see, has a bread-oven on the right hand side. One of the features that help to push the date of this section of the building right back in time, is that it was originally built without a chimney. This was added inside the then north-western gable end. As there will be two other woodburning stoves, I'm  a little reluctant to fit one here as well, as this room will function as the dining hall and I'm rather attached to the theatre of a blazing fire when having friends or relatives around for supper. The fireplace must have smoked a bit, becaue the old farmer lowered the Oak bean about fifty years ago. The strengthening above it is Bullhead rail from the Tenbury branch line. On the left of the image is an old pot-hanger and a crane for the kettle from days gone by.).
     
         I’m currently trying to decide if I should heed the advice of friends and fit a heated floor downstairs…..but if I allow any more complications – I may never get this ruddy railway built….! Anyway….I’m assessing the added cost and delay at the moment….
     
    Utility;-
     
         There is an old Brew-House. I have installed a new concrete floor and  this room will be ‘Mission Control’, with the Boiler, Heat Store, batteries and other associated electronics, as well as the washing machine and drier et al.
     
    Insulation;-
     
         Firstly, one has to realise that as built, these walls, despite all the Oak, are very narrow. They are also very uneven. To square this circle, studding was built inside. After putting in place a breathable membrane, two different layers of insulation were fitted. Inside the studding, thick, rigid insulation, clad with foil, and between this and the membrane, soft mineral wool. This allows all of the unevenness of the walls to be catered for. The whole then was covered with foil-backed plasterboard. The actual depth varies, but it averages around 12”/300mm total. All walls and ceilings are thus equipped.
     
    13)

    (My own 'system' of insulation, all ready for the fitting of the final layer, - foil-backe damp-proof plasterboard.).
     
     
    Naturally, wiring was installed as we went along.  Upstairs, all of the external skirting are huge, 12” tall English Oak, and behind this, there is a void for piping and wiring. All the skirting boards are fixed in place by brass screws, so as to allow easy access for any future alterations or repairs. Every few yards, a flexible-plastic duct is built into the wall to allow services to route up into the loft and/or cross the building. Apart from neatness, there is a very good structural reason for this. Many of these old structures have been unnecessarily weakened by the drilling of floor-joists etc. My system avoids such butchery in almost all cases.
     
    Weather;-
     
    'Huh...??? Now what's he rambling-on about...?' I hear you muttering into that last dregs of your tinnie...! Bear with me here, as a somewhat lengthy prologue to this subject is required, so with apologies to any meteorologists or astronomers reading this for my crude presentation, here goes...! ;- 
         We hear much talk today about ‘global warming’ and no sane person can dispute the fact that we have been heavily polluting our beautiful planet – and yes, affecting the climate. Sadly however, vested interests have taken-over this agenda, moving the focus away from the real issue – pollution, onto a far more nebulous one – ‘climate’.
         We know for a fact that the climate has varied hugely over time. Over geological time, the changes have been massive. However, even over historical time – that is to say the last few thousand years, big changes have taken place. The Sahara Desert used to be green and filled with wildlife. The Romans grew vines in Britain. Much of the mediaeval period was warm – and yet in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the UK endured severe winters every year.
    The prime driver for these historical climate variations is the amount of energy the Earth absorbs from the Sun. The Sun goes through metronomically regular periods. The normal short-term cycle is about eleven years. People have been aware of this for many years, and even when the first telescopes were made, one of the very earliest observations was the existence of Sun-Spots, the increase and decrease of which denote the shorter eleven-year Solar Cycle.
         Now - the ordinary eleven year Sunspot Cycle is not a massive issue - normally. However, between 1645 to 1715, an epic low of Sunspot activity was observed, and this has become known as the Maunder Minimum ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum .).
     

     
         The amount of solar radiation that our planet absorbs is also governed by orbital factors, and of course, our planet has a tilted axis, which creates our seasonal changes. There are however, other factors at work, by way of celestial mechanics. The orbital-path of our planet is not perfectly circular – and other planetary alignments perturb this further. Some of these are known and predictable, - one very interesting set are the Milankovitch Cycles - (Link here for the more masochistic readers.)
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
     
          Thus, within the greater, much longer, geological periods of climate change, smaller, more regular changes take place -  and at a human scale, these are what are of much more concern than that the temperatures were when the dinosaurs roamed our planet millions of years ago. These climatic effects we can see happening long before the Industrial Revolution, and latterly seen in the Mediaeval Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age, which was still being felt into Early Victorian times, when the Thames froze every year and there was an annual ‘Frost Fair’ held on the river…..
         All of the foregoing is to explain another reason for my creating an off-grid house with huge amounts of insulation. As per the predictable Melankovich Cycle, we are now entering into a new alignment which will cause an enlargement of the Earth’s orbit. This will not be large….but since the drop-of in Solar Radiation is more or less exponential, it will cause a fall in the amount of Solar Radiation available to heat our planet – and ALL of the Earth’s weather is driven, 100% by this energy absorbed by the Earth from the Sun – but there is more…. The current observations of the Sun show historically low Sunspot activity. More sunspots means more heat, less Sunspots means less energy emitted from the Sun.
         Thus, as you can see this will be a ‘Double-Whammy’. In past aeons, such combinations of factors are thought to have triggered ice-ages. That is not to say this will happen this time….but here in the northern hemisphere, especially this far north – and even more especially in the UK where we sit, precariously-balance between three weather systems, even a fairly minor change could make a BIG difference. Will this end life on Earth…? No, but here in the UK, we could easily see the return of some very very severe winter weather. Leaving aside the practicalities of transport etc, simply keeping warm then becomes a big challenge – and these days – a huge expense to say the least.
         I remember the winter of 1963.....and if that was to become the norm, I'd need to be seriously well prepared.
         Do I think this will come to pass…? I’ve no idea - I hope not – but I’d prefer to hedge my bets….. In this scenario -  we may even come, ironically, to thank our ‘Man-Made Global Warming’, as it may stop the climatic balance being shifted far enough to bring this potential return to really cold snowy winters.
     
         That’s probably the longest excuse for lack of progress on a model railway in history, but I hope it has been of some little interest.  
     
     
     


  5. Methuselah
    Floods, Plagues and Pestilence - yes really.....
     
         Given the rising global pandemic and all of the associated uncertainties, even incipient panic by some, immersing oneself in the world of miniature fantasy may seem like a highly frivolous activity of little import - and in truth - it is. On the other hand, a non-reactionary approach and a sense of historical perspective probably make for a calmer, less panic-prone citizen - so you'll excuse me if a lean towards the latter view.
     
         We had terrible flooding locally this winter, a great tragedy for many, and resulting in ongoing misery and hardship. Fortunately, being in a reasonably elevated position, my property suffered no significant ill-effects to the biblical inundations. What may yet prove to throw a massive spanner in the works for me is the pandemic, and it's effects upon the supply of workers, both skilled and unskilled. I have a big program of work on my property this year, and until I get that to a reasonable state of advancement, serious progress on my diorama is simply not going to be possible - I simply dare not allow myself to become prematurely diverted. Of course, that hasn't stopped me honing some of my ideas. The enforced delay has allowed time to come-up with a number of improvements that had not hitherto revealed themselves to my ageing brain. 
         The biggest single - and recurring problem to manifest itself, in terms of layout design, has been that of space, and, rather like the child whose eyes are bigger than his belly, I've found that I had somewhat underestimated the space that I will need, not by much, but a miss is as good as a mile... I've become rather obsessed with not bending or foreshortening the diorama, and whilst Woofferton wasn't very big as railway stations and junctions go, I'd not really allowed enough for the curves at the ends, carrying the line away to imagined horizons.
         At the end of the month, I'll finally move the thirty miles or so to the farm. I've had a caravan on site for a couple of years now. It's a few years old and pretty basic, but perfectly tolerable  - at least until you get visitors....whereupon it starts to get like a sardine tin...but in the current  situation, that’s not likely to be an issue…!
         Had I gone for a normal property restoration, I'd have been finished long ago. Being, apparently, some sort of masochistic idealist, I'm trying to create a sort of eco-friendly, off-grid paradise. Doing this with a six-hundred year old house is not without it's challenges. Last season, was mostly taken-up with groundworks - digging and burying a kings-ransom in various types of pipes and ducts. As well as normal sewers - to a septic tank of course, there is a system to collect and store rainwater - lots of it.  Overflows, back-up pipes to the well, ducts for wires for the various pumps and sensors etc. I could go on, but you get the drift. 
         Part of the new railway room will in fact sit over the main water storage tank - something of an impediment to progress....! I've had to wait for the ground to dry-out a little before digging the rather large hole for the water tank, but this will happen very shortly now. Thus, being off-grid for sewerage and water, I will have to address the electrical system. Currently, I'm using mains power, but next year will see the fitment of a goodly number of PV panels and batteries to store surplus energy. The rest of this year will see new floors and walls at the ground-level, a new porch, and finally, the railway room/outbuilding.
     
         Having mentioned Floods and Plagues - lastly - Pestilence. Not clouds of Locust fortunately - but mice. I don't actually have a huge infestation - but then again, it only takes a few mice to cause untold damage.... To this end, moving with me will be my two Savannah's. These cats are, we are told, pedigree cross-breeds of some sort of Asian cat, with the wild African Serval. They are not especially large, but they are exceptionally athletic - and very good mousers, so they will have a field-day - or at least I ruddy hope so. In case you are thinking that I paid the reputed thousands for these cats, let me inform you that they were rescue cats and came free.... Rather foolishly, having always owned cats, I thought that I'd be able to tame them and bend them to my ways. Well, it's fair to say that I've only been partially successful. They are siblings, and had been used for breeding at a cattery, and, truth be told, had never really been handled. They aren't nasty as such - and are very clean.....but they live for each other - and ONLY for each other. You can't just pick them-up like teddy bears and cuddle them. They are nervous, jumpy and highly strung, and if panicked, will hiss at you like a Cobra about to strike…. However - they are very beautiful, and have limitless curiosity. They move like water flowing and both of them together like a shoal of fish. Some people who have had them from kittens put them on leads. These two would never suffer such domestic abuse and are far beyond such impositions upon their freedoms. All interactions have to be on their terms. Oddly, they were house-cats when they arrived, but they now love to roam free. When it's cold or wet, they much prefer their basket or propping-up a scalding-hot radiator. When it’s a cold but sunny day, they are often to be found, sat like book-ends on the window as a mirror-image.
    In Roman times,  people used to have niches by the entrance to the house, in which they placed their household gods - the Lares & Penates, to ward-off evil spirits and bad luck. In my case - I'm hoping  my Lares & Penates  will rid me of Pestilence too.  Anyway - their utility as mousers is about to be put to the test. I'm just hoping that the mice haven't caused damage to all my stored railway treasures...
     
         Model railway-related acquisitions have now slowed to a tiny dribble, and the real work is about to begin…..
  6. Methuselah

    10. Maturation.

    By Methuselah,

    Whilst I’ve always subscribed to the school of ‘If you’ve nowt to say – keep schtum’, I have noticed that it’s been over a year since I last blogged here. Even worse, I see that I will have returned to railway modeling for three years in January, yet still cannot run a train….
     
                Unfortunately, before I can erect the new woodshed extension to accommodate the model railway, I have to complete other building works at the farm – and I’m still living off-site, just to complicate matters. Model-wise, I have not been wholly inactive, since I have continued to build an alarmingly large pile of supermarket banana-boxes, stuffed with….well, modeling ‘stuff’…
     
                The really good thing is that time has allowed the maturation of my plans, and I haven’t seen the need to make any serious changes for some time. The direct blockage to progress at the moment is that the site for the building extension is partly above a large rainwater collection water-tank that I have to dig a vast hole to bury. I’m renovating a very ancient building, and at the same time turning it into an off-grid ‘eco-house’ for want of a better description.  It will have a private water-supply as well as drainage, and next year, hopefully, will be off-grid for power too. It’s been a really massive undertaking for an old bloke – so the modeling has had to take a back seat for now, as you may well imagine.
                
                Some of the lessons learnt on the main house will be incorporated into the model railway extension to the woodshed, principally in the form of vast amounts of insulation to walls, floors and ceilings. I’ve used the German ‘Passive House’ standard as my inspiration (  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house  in case your curiosity gets the better of you…!) – but have not been able to follow it slavishly, as it’s intended for new-build, and the farmhouse is about six hundred years old…
     
                Railway modeling is not exactly noted for exercising one’s cardiovascular system, and, since I absolutely cannot abide being cold, and since the main heating system will be next door, the railway room will have some radiators, and the small internal control cabin will have it’s own small solid-fuel stove to avoid heating the main room every time – and handy for a brew as well.
                The space available will be approximately 50' x 15', so to be usable in summer – as well as warm in the winter, all that insulation and some heating is vital.
     
                Years ago, I bought a vast site hut that was surplus from Tarmac. It was an all-wooden structure and was entirely sectional, with one-piece roof trusses. It was easy to erect, and although I sold that property about twenty-five years ago, it’s still standing and in use today. Whilst that was pretty huge – I seem to recall about 25’ x 75’, the new building I’m going to erect will utilize some of the modular ideas so that I can make sections ahead of time and the actual erection should be quite rapid. I may blog about these works in case any of it is useful to readers of this blog. As well as being warm, cost is also, of course a factor, so whilst durable, it will be as cheaply made as practicable.
     
                I’m always loathe to get pinned-down to a fixed schedule when there are so many variables, but suffice it to say that the plan is to erect next year, 2020. The tank will go into the ground soon, clearing the way for the footings, once I have tidied-up the site. I’ll make the modules in the workshops in the dry, and by the time I have enough to start erection, I’m sure we’ll be back to the warmth and long days of summer.
     
         More once the footings are in.
  7. Methuselah

    7. Evolution.

    By Methuselah,

    After re-entering this hobby just over a year and a half ago, it took me the first year to get any sort of real plan together. I have, several times, thought that out of the mists, some sort of settled plan had emerged, and it had - sort of....!
    One thing that is now clear is that it pays to stay flexible for as long as possible. Now that I've finally started to do more drawings to scale, I'm both finding the flaws in my ideas - and getting new, improved ideas.
     
    I finally got around to visiting Pendon yesterday, and what a treat it is - if rather daunting for someone coming back to all this after many years. The standards are pretty stratospheric, with so much to see and admire. Hats-off then to all those who have contributed to this miniature wonder....! It is, however, very inspirational, even if one knows that one must have more modest aspirations. There is little I can add to the superlatives already showered upon this masterpiece - so I won't.
    One of the things that really interested me was the effect of having so much space - and not having to cram too much in - or use absurdly tight curves - something that I was already planning. All of my non-scale curves will be hidden - and there will be no distortion of the real locations dimensions or curves. This will only be possible as a) The real locations lend themselves to this, and b) Because I will have a reasonable space to build in.
    I was also interested to see that authentic camber/cant had been incorporated into the track some areas - a prototypical feature absent on most model railways.
    A further point of interest was that the whole running-system is basically fully-automated - albeit in DC. The clever electronics are all in the layout - rather than in the engines. Magnets are used under trains to provide sensing of track occupation. I'm after a similar system - however utilising DCC. However - having an aim, an aspiration, is one thing. Realisation is quite another...!
    One of the more mind-bending facts about Pendon is that most of the buildings also have scale interiors too.... In many cases, this is unseen, and even with the layout in night-mode', it's still very difficult to discern any interior-detail. This probably works great in 7mm scale, but at 4mm....it's something that really needs to be used very selectively. I won't have an army of volunteers helping me either...!
     
    One of the problems that has been bugging me for a while is access. I will have a branch-line off the main line bisecting the main room right across the middle halfway down the room - it's unavoidable if I want to keep the main junction looking correct. I'll also need to enter the centre area, as the whole layout will be viewable only from the central space, and only the control-point is outside.
    The scenery - and the multi-layered nature of the track design make moving sections of baseboard very impractical - not impossible - just difficult. One solution to this problem is two 'sumps' - underpasses really, about 1,000mm deep. This is a new feature, but fortunately - it's come along early-enough to be planned-in, if the movable sections can't be made practicable. I'm still working to resolve this problem.
     
    Finally, back to Pendon, and the attached photo. They have many fine locos at Pendon, but the one which most caught my fancy was the attached 4-4-0, which I believe to be a Dean/Armstrong design, very similar to the Dean Single. At some point, I must build one of these, they really are an absolute stunner.
     
    M.
  8. Methuselah

    9. The Prototype.

    By Methuselah,

    If you have been following my inane ramblings thus far, you may have been curious as to where this diorama (I confess a disliking of the term 'layout'.) is set, but before I launch into all that, I'd just like to recap how I 'accidentally' got to this juncture - after not having been a railway modeller for over forty years.....
     
    It started with a simple desire to put a few items on the mantle to represent a railway in my area. Having then collected far too much for my mantle, this developed into a plan to build a 4mm replica of a local station in P4. So far so - ahem.....
     
    At this point I realised that I'd soon get bored with only an end-to end with more fiddle-yard than layout, just as I did forty-plus years ago. Added to that, I could only envisage ever managing to get together a very limited stable of P4 locos - and all smaller branch locos at that.
     
    At that point....I decided to model a local junction where my P4 branch joined, but to do it, still in 4mm scale, and in OO gauge. There were some very hard-headed and practical reasons for this. OO locos are available in infinite variety - and cheaply too. This would enable me to run mainline 'heavies' and rapidly get together a stable of locos and stock to catch-up after that forty year absence. Yet another reason was that you can get away with OO in the garden, but P4 outside is simply not practical. The garden allows one to run anything at all, in my case, so long as it's pre-BR buggeration.
     
    Mixing P4 and OO is a bit unusual to say the least, but if you will bear with me, you will see that in this instance, it will work pretty well. Of course they will be really two 'layouts' within one diorama. However, the junction end of the P4 branch would only have been wasted as a fiddle-yard in any case. See - it makes sense really....
     
    The room will basically have the P4 down one side, and the OO down the other with a centre-space for access, and viewing etc. All operations will be based in an integral Signal-Cabin with a view inside for the diorama - and outside for the garden line. The OO is a racetrack (Roundy-Roundy), but about half of it will be hidden under the P4 branch. All of the visible track, P4 & OO will follow the original curves and lengths. Only where the lines dive into the scenery will they diverge.
     
    To add a bit of atmosphere, trains arriving at the foot of the garden incline back-up to the shed will activate the bells in some old block-apparatus I have, each line having it's own ring. This may be useful in case they are struggling. This will also be triggered by trains leaving the lower gyrus to climb up to the scenic level. There will be no attempt to actually link these old lumps of junk to actually reflect any prototypical block-working etc. It's just for fun.
     
    The branch itself will represent the original section of the Tenbury Branch, that is the Joint section. Tenbury eastwards will be into a fiddle. Westwards it'll dive into the scenery and reappear at Easton Court, a tiny station with only a small SB, one platform and a single point and siding. It then dives back into the scenery to arrive at Woofferton Junction, where it crosses the OO mainline into it's own separate west bay on the north-south Shrewsbury & Hereford mainline. Each element - all three stations - will be undistorted and uncompressed, however, naturally, the longer lengths between the branch stations are compressed within the scenic-breaks - well, you have to draw a line somewhere......
     
    Thankfully, the buildings are few - and of a relatively simple, undecorated design.
     
    There is a plethora of information available about the real location and the history of the line easily available online. Suffice it to say that the main North-South line was the Shrewsbury & Hereford Railway, later to become a Joint LNWR/LMS - GWR line.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrewsbury_and_Hereford_Railway
     
    The architecture and signalling on this line was very much originally LNWR, but later, the signalling was updated to GWR practices and equipment, much of which remains today. Although the scenery was superb, the stations were not really the usual chocolate-box pretty of many GWR lines. The real interest is that this set-up offers running of a great variety of trains, in several liveries. The remaining refuge siding is still in use today. In the old days, they would often have been occupied by heavy mineral trains. Added to that, overall changes were minimal, so that by a change of wagons for car and the period dress of the human figures, one can run trains representing a remarkably wide window of time, although the infrastructure will be pinned at just before Grouping to facilitate maximum flexibility.
    The Branch was originally operated by the LNWR in it's very early days, then, with the branch being extended to Kidderminster, as an end-on junction betwixt the LNWR & GWR at Tenbury, the GWR took-over the operational running of the whole Branch. The LNWR/LMS always retained Running-Rights into Tenbury, but I have found no evidence of them exercising this after the GWR took-over the running of the whole branch. Any evidence /photos of such usage would be gratefully received....as would any photos or drawings of the small loco turntable at Tenbury that interestingly, originated from Bewdley of all places.
     
    Like the mainline - the branch as far as Tenbury was strongly along LNWR practices. The quite large signal cabin at Woofferton was of LNWR design, as were the slightly oddball SC at Tenbury, where there were originally two, the smaller eventually being demolished in the 1940's. Between Wooferton and Tenbury was the aforementioned small station/halt at Easton Court.
    Although my starting-point in the adventure was Tenbury - and it's still the core of this project - it's easier to present, starting with Woofferton Junction. I'll move-on to Easton Court and Tenbury in my next missive.
     
    Woofferton Junction was on the main line, and if the Shrewsbury & Hereford Railway had not existed, then the branch into Tenbury would have been a non-starter. Below are a number of basic maps attached to this Blog. For ease of presentation, I have tipped them onto their side, so the north-south mainline runs L-R. North is, of course on the LHS.
     
    Map A; 1913 OS.
    Map B; Current SatPic.
    Map C; Blend of A&B.
     
    There is a caveat with regard to the Woofferton 1913 OS map, as I am pretty sure that some minor details had already changed by 1913 which are not reflected in the map (Not unusual.) - however, these really only relate to the sidings for the sawmill and the wagon-turntable in front of the goods shed. Changes were also made to the loops/refuges just north of the station. In the 1913 OS version, the lines into the gravel-pits remain, but the refuges is single. later, there were refuges both northbound and southbound, which lasted until the late 1980's. Today, only the northbound refuge loop remains. The Ballast Pit Sidings were removed between the wars.
     
    Today, as well as the main line, three of the four bridges remain (One, the most northerly on the A49, is a recent replacement though.) and as well as the SC, the GS and SC remain. The loop, it's signalling, as well as a pair of crossovers between the SC & GS still remain, along with manual semaphore signals, controlled from the old LNWR SC. Todays semaphores are basically tubular metal GWR, with some of the usual added 'Elf& Safety' excrescences. The poor old LNWR SC has been re-windowed in ghastly UPVC and the wooden stairs replaced by galvanised steel. Sadly, unless it's protected, it's go when the semaphores go - and that can't be too far off. (If we get any decent MSE's [Mass Solar Ejections.] then the preserved lines may be the only ones left usable...!). The GS remains, in commercial use as part of a builders-merchants, and the SB is a private dwelling. Gone are the platforms, northbound buildings, FB, and the nearby Engine Shed, built in about 1862 and closed in about 1900. It remained in use as the west-end of the branches only water-supply. The next water, eastbound was at Cleobury Mortimer.
     
    On the branch, all of the buildings and most of the bridges remain, apart from, ironically, at Tenbury itself, where all that remains in the original road-bridge on the Clee Hill Road.
     
    I've set-out to make as few compromises as possible in the planning of this diorama. Whether I can follow-through in the detail delivery of the project only time will tell, but I feel happy with the basic plan now. Next time I will describe a little about the branch line, and show some scale sketches of the upper scenic 1,000mm level. At the hidden 500mm level will be the main gyrus that allows trains to be stored and routed. All the fiddles, such as they are, will be there too, with the P4 branch of course having it's own separate fiddle with a TT. Long gentle inclines will link the two levels, and the access to the garden lines will be from this lower level too, via a closable, weatherproof hatch.
  9. Methuselah
    We human apes are odd creatures. One of our less destructive instincts is that Magpie tendency to 'collect' - aptly manifested in the case of model railways. It's a case of Mea Culpa - and I am forced to admit that I do have some difficulty in reining-in my acquisitions.... I have to be in for the delivery man on Monday. Next week is significant in that it should mark the arrival of the last of my outstanding orders for RTR items I had on order long-term - in this case the Rapido LNER Dynamometer Car and a couple of the Rapido Stirling Singles. These are items far removed from my GWR/ GWR - LNWR Joint inside layout - but which I can and will run on my - also yet to be built - garden layout, where no real rules will apply and I can run anything.
    Forty or fifty years ago, received wisdom was that 4mm scale was unsuitable for garden railways. When I returned to model railways some year and a half ago - after a break of some forty-five years - I was pleasantly surprised to see that the use of 4mm scale outdoors had become quite commonplace. I'd planned an internal 4mm railway, but building an outside extension opened-up exciting unplanned-for opportunities. For one thing - one can run scale-length trains instead of the usual truncated representations, and, of course, since there is no model scenery - one can run trains of any period or company.
    Currently, I'm evaluating the best methods of construction for the garden railway - but it's clear that the biggest issue is not dirt - but expansion and contraction, especially during meteorological conditions like current heatwave - although today has been rain, gales and 13C...!
    Far too many of these garden railways seem to have rather poorly-laid track and a rickety base structure. These issues are easier to address, but allowing for the sort of heatwave conditions we have endured the past weeks requires much more thought. My current thinking is to not solder any joints, but to allow a large expansion-gap and free longitudinal movement. Additionally, I will not use the Peco flexitrack (I'm using Peco Code 75 Bullhead internally where it's visible - but the cheaper Code 100 externally, as it's more robust too.) in full lengths, but cut it into much shorter sections, each with a dropper-wire soldered-on to it. The top-deck will be scaffold planks or thick plywood covered with roofing-felt. The verticals will be lengths of scaffold-poles driven directly into the ground with a rammer. Deck joints will be over the supports and will have both vertical and horizontal adjustment. The track itself will only be pinned - I hope this will suffice... All of that should be weatherproof - well - in theory at least...!
    When it comes to actually running the trains - they will all be DCC - I haven't the foggiest with regard to current-drops etc. I'm guessing that I'll have to boost the current - at least to the farthest sections of track. Is there a formula for this I wonder, to calculate current-drop with distance...?
    In order to achieve decent, smooth curves, I will use a wooden guide for the inner radius. Then - in theory at least, if I use a spacer for the outer tracks, I should end-up with smooth, matching and sweeping curves, rather than threepenny bits.
    One of the possibly dafter ideas for the garden railway is to include an incline. It may be that long trains, moisture and dirt produce an unworkable edifice - but I can't resist trying it...! The reasons however are threefold. 1) The garden slopes anyway. 2) I used to watch steam on the Lickey Incline as a kid. 3) Because it's a challenge. I will start-off with the exact gradient of the real Lickey incline. However - the deck-sections will be adjustable, so I will be able to lessen the incline if it proves unworkable. Sadly, I don't have enough space to keep the incline as straight as the real one - so it will be a sort of 'j'-shape to get it to fit into the garden at the correct length.
     
    The whole purpose of the garden extension is gratuitous entertainment. Beyond possibly a few signals, there will be no scenery other than the backdrop of wonderful English countryside. I am setting out to use camber/cant on the inside railway, but it may will be just too much hassle to include this outdoors, unless I can devise a simple and weatherproof solution - which is looking impossible at the moment. It's a pity as it's a prominent and much neglected feature of full-sized railways rarely portrayed in model form. I well remember the excitement of seeing thundering express steam trains leaning-in to the curve at speed when steam was still fully operational. Even better was an S-shaped curve where one could see the train writhe like a snake. Currently my only idea is to make an adjustable jig for my trusty router. Bearing in mind that I'd not be able to then use roofing-felt on the curves and would need to apply some sort of brushed finish - I think that any applied fillets might be an invitation to moisture ingress. Anyhow - I'll probably make the jig anyway and see if it works as designed.
     
    The only other little niggle rattling-around in my mind is getting pins to penetrate hardish material. I may need to resort to something like a nail-gun if they can use something fairly small. More research needed there too.
     
    I'll know it's all been worth it if I can sit-out in the evening sunshine drinking a brandy and watch some of my rather eclectic collection chunter around the garden. Onwards & upwards...!
     
    M.
     
    PS;- Photo added to show the falling terrain. The elevated deck for the railway will run along the hedge-line in the foreground, just below eye height. My hope it that the distance of the scenery will double for a natural reasonably scale-looking backdrop. We shall see...!
  10. Methuselah
    In and around a massive house renovation, a corner of loft-space has seen a growing pile of 'Railway Boxes' collecting dust - of which I have an inexhaustible supply....!!! The dust that is... Most of the contents of the boxes, almost without exception, are used. True - some are little used, but not truly new. I'm more than happy with this approach, as one get much more for very much less.
    My unusual mixture of 4mm in both OO & P4 means that, for the most part the OO stuff is RTR (75%RTR) - The P4 is either kits to build - or kits to convert, with a little RTR to convert where practicable (25%RTR)
    Whilst buying new P4, RTR is not possible. I have bought a few OO items brand-new, and in doing so, it has raised a few interesting issues;-
     
    My first was the Oxford six-wheeled 'TOAD'. Very nice. Next came the Heljan GWR Diesel Railcar - again, very nice - and I see online that folks have already managed to convert some to P4, a useful possibility for the future then. A few weeks ago I took delivery of a new Bachmann GNR Atlantic - this being to use the same set of GNR coaches as the Stirlings. I've also an arcane interest now in Atlantics (Such as the GWR's De Glehn's, of which I am building two.) as well as Singles. Anyway - it's a great model apart from the bent conrods to clear the motionwork, which is arguably unnecessary.
    Yesterday my Heljan GWR 4700 arrived - and very splendid it is too. It's taken rather a bashing in the RMWeb forums - mainly, it seems owing to damage in transit. I'm happy to say mine was undamaged and runs very well indeed. It's a great model, and looks much better 'in the flesh'. True - they had forgotten to add the GWR loco-number to the buffer-beams, but it was otherwise perfect. Result...!
    Now - on order, I have the Rails' LNER Dyno' Car, as well as a couple of he Rapido Stirling Singles, with sound. The Stirling's haven't been bashed yet, but the LNER Dyno'-Car is currently getting rather a pasting in the forums here for the supposed lack of lining, about which there has been much debate. This is a pity, as this is another superb model. Judging from the photographic evidence - it seems the pre-war Mallard record-run version should have been lined - and now it looks as though even the post-war Loco Trials version was still lined. The jury is still out - but those are the indications. Much has been made of the consultation of 'experts'. Now, I have many decades of building/rebuilding in another area of historic transport. Something that I have learned the hard way is that many experts, like me, are rather self-appointed. The moral is clear, - by all means consult the experts - but ask them to point to the historical evidence - then make an informed judgement yourself. Their 'opinion', on it's own is next to worthless without the back-up of trustworthy contemporaneous evidence. Modern tomes are frequently wrong. I've even found reams of mistakes in respected autobiographies written by people employed by the firms that made XYZ.....
     
    Trust the evidence left by the people that made the history - or the documents or artefacts that remain today. What's needed is real evidence created at the same time as the object in question - not mere opinion. Human memory may fail, but hard evidence will not. If I'm asked, I will often have an opinion, but I will also have a contemporaneous document or artefact to support this, or else it comes with a clear health-warning.
     
    Anyway - my real point here is that, even in my dotage, I have learnt a valuable lesson - which is that all this 'pre-ordering' malarky is great for the retailers, but a risky gamble for us punters. I will not be participating any further. I'll let the gamblers find all the issues before I make a punt and risk my Coin of the Realm.....
    As for the Dyno' Car - I still look forward to it, and frankly, I suspect that the lining - if correctly scaled would be almost invisible in any case.
    The Stirlings have been preceded by samples, and thus far, they seem to have been very favourably received indeed - but this may not have been the case of course...... I saw some Hornby mag' video, and the sounds seemed very good too. A GNR train of teak six-wheelers, double-headed - with sound... What's not to like...?
     
    (Edit;- Having looked at some further Posts such as Mike Tice's a 492 & Coachman's at 494, it's Game, Set & Match. It clearly was lined until the post war 'Restoration' - no doubt whatsoever. In fact- re-watching the Pathe film etc that was panned in the thread show Mallard sat there - and the lined DC next to it at 7:33 - if you need further proof - just freeze-frame the video there. 1950's & '60's were not a great time for restorations, but in fairness, we easily forget how today, we can summon-up data an the flick of a keyboard.).
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqmYFotXqDg
  11. Methuselah
    The Accidental Modeller.
     
    I only returned to model railways last January (2017), after a hiatus of over forty years…..so, a year on, and before I go further, that probably requires a passing explanation.
    Back in the late 1960’s I moved from the RTR stuff into what, for that time, was ‘fine-scale’. The old K’s, Wills & Gem kits etc may seem very crude now – but they were all we had, and if you wanted anything outside of a very narrow band of prototypes, unlike today, you had to make it. At the time, I remember a small GWR branch line OO terminus model called ‘Porthleven’, which was featured in ‘Railway Modeller’ in about 1968 I think, and with which I was very taken. I actually found a copy of that issue last year, and it now all looks a bit crude, but P4 was unknown to me, and beyond my ken in those far-off days. I built my own archetypal made-up GWR branch terminus in OO, complete with 009 narrow-gauge feeder. Like you do….
    It never had a name, but it all looked pretty enough. However, there were problems…. It had to be mobile, yet it was really waaaay too heavy – way too much timber…and plaster of Paris…! Worst of all, even using a new, at that time, CODAR PCM controller, five-pole motors and flywheels…and building carefully, none of my locos ran as well in reality as they did in my imagination……… The locos stuttered. They jerked. They stopped and started with a violence that would have liquidised the crew and passengers from G-forces in real life…. Added to all that, I had so many other interests, that something had to give……and it had to be the disappointing model railways.
     
    I subsequently lived for around twenty years, within earshot of a preserved steam railway – so I never abandoned my fascination with the old railways. Then the worm turned…
     
    Last year, having become interested in the history of certain disused rural branch-lines, I thought it might be nice to have a few ‘representative’ items to collect dust on the mantle…..maybe a little tank-engine and a couple of clerestories….. You can probably guess the rest…! At that point, I genuinely had NO intention of taking-up model railways again….. Honest…!
    Shortly afterwards…. when I realised that I’d acquired rather too much to perch on the mantle…..well, twenty locos was pushing the original concept/excuse rather - I thought, oh well, I could just make a small branch station etc. Just a small simple wee diorama... Ahem… Now, the wiser readers will know what I had, in my dotage, forgotten, - which is that it is truly amazing just how much space you need to replicate a real station, - even a small one - without cheating…. Whilst I was in the process of realising that I didn’t really have space for this project, I settled on two ideas that were basically wholly mutually incompatible….! To wit ;-
     
    1. The branch would be very nice in P4 (Don’t laugh – I had no idea how tricky P4 can be…!). &
    2. That I’d like some sort of ‘roundy-roundy’ for the express-trains and long goods etc.
     
    These are not normally compatible aspirations. Now, not exactly having my whole life before me, not having unlimited funds, time nor patience, it was clear that some sort of imaginative compromise was required, as there was no way I could create a huge fleet in P4. At the same time, I wanted to run some bulk scale-length trains, which really means RTR in OO.
    The solution that I have come-up with may not be absolutely unique – I don’t claim it is, - but I have not thus far seen anyone else – possibly foolish enough to try it…. Please let me know if you have...!
     
    My Solution ;- When I started buying items, I crossed an important Rubicon when I started acquiring main-line items, as it was clear that none of it would be suitable for a rural branch-line. What I am creating is really two railways that meet in the middle as it were. I will have a main line in OO, so that I can run all the bulk of my RTR OO. This will run through a junction, and will also have access to the garden, so I will be able to run scale length trains at will. The branch is planned to be P4 to satisfy my predilections for scale . The key is, of course, that it’s all the exact same 4mm scale. My plan is that the P4 will chart it’s own path through the junction, retaining the original accurate track plan without any need for deviation, since the branch had it’s own platform. I’ll have to make-up special crossings diamonds, but since these are all curved, I’d have had to do that anyway, even if it was all OO or all P4. Naturally, there will be a few ‘transition-sections’, where trains will not be able to run, but this is an inherent compromise that I have decided to live with. Will it look odd…? Not really – there is no change in scale – only a slight difference in gauge. In the fullness of time – I may regret this, but having drawn some examples out, it’s looking better than I expected – and in the final analysis – it’s only me that it has to satisfy. It may be anathema to some P4 purists, but I think that most will understand that you cannot realistically expect to run P4 outside with it’s microscopic flanges.
    One of the reasons for the explosion of collected stock was that the main-line junction end of the branch was originally GWR – LNWR Joint, later GWR – LMS Joint. Being very much a GWR blokie, this has required something of a mental readjustment….! An old chap I know who has spent his life working on real trains and is an oracle on any railways history, joked that ‘the LNWR was created just to make the GWR look even better’…! A bit harsh maybe – but I do like the idea of some variety and contrast.
     
    The good things then ;-
     


    · Variety of branch & main line.
    · Variety of GWR, LNWR & LMS.
    · The infrastructure never changed in the timeframe I’m modelling around 1900 – 1947. ***
    · I have a real place to model and constrain my ambitions.
    · I’m not really interested in shunting etc. I want the diorama to look like the real place – and the trains to sun smoothly and convincingly to animate it.
    · In the garden section, here will be no ‘Correct’ – I will be able to keep ANYTHING in the storage sidings to come out and play, even things that would never have run on my scenic section in period… LNER, Southern – simply anything pre ‘47.  

    The bad things ;-
     
    · I’m totally out of touch.
    · I lack my former patience.
    · DCC is all totally new to me.
    · I like the new sound facility – but not the cost…..
    · I have to keep my ambitions within something that is satisfying – yet achievable.
    · I’m apt to overcomplicate projects. (At least I admit it…!).
     
    One of the biggest issues was ‘Where the hell do I stick this thing…?’. My original plan was to rebuild an old outbuilding out in the front yard to look like a signal box. Great idea…but of course, once I realised just how much space I’d need….it’d have hidden my house……! Back to the drawing board then. The next option was to use the upstairs of an adjoining building. The room is pretty big. However, I’d already planned to make this into carpentry workshop…. Even worse, was the fact that to access the garden for the long expresses, would require a large and complex lift system. I started to design it – and then realised that it was a nonsense. Nor was I happy to fill the downstairs workshop with a layout. The solution that I have settled on is to rebuild and extend some old woodsheds at the rear of the house. This will give me the access to the garden when needed and avoid buggering-up my other work areas. OK, after all that agonising, I had a basic plan.
    One of the other parameters for the project was rather unusual. I want to be able to sit outside in the garden when the weather is nice, and see a whole variety of different trains pass, without the need for an operator. Clearly, this predicates DCC and a PC running some sort of program – and although I know this can be done, in principle, I haven’t the foggiest how to actually do it….! Yet.
    The layout itself will be on two/three levels. The top layer will be just the scenic shizzle. At the bottom will be an omnidirectional gyrus (Did I really just type that..?). This will serve to allow trains both from the scenic section above, and the garden outside to enter, leave or return, or for ‘shuffling’ to take place. There will be no shunting as such, but all the trains will be ready made-up, sat in a bank of loops. My idea is that it will operate like the music on a smart-phone or PC. Just as you can play the tunes in order – or at random – the PC will be able to call-out trains ‘into play’, then park them and replace them with something different, by a pre-set order, or at random. A set of gradients connect the top scenic-level with the gyrus below, to enable trains to be selected to go above, rather than outside. At the moment, I’m not sure as to the gap between the two main levels. Too big and I’ll create traction problems, too shallow, and I will not have enough room to reach in-between to sort out problems. My guess is 12” – 18”.
    Oddly enough, all this tends to make for less, rather than more points, and about 90% of the points will be associated with the storage sidings (It’s not really a fiddle-yard as such.). How many storage loops…? As many as I can manage to fit-in…! There will be no points outside whatsoever, and remarkably few on the scenic area. Inside the gyrus on the lower-level will be the banks of trains stored, ready for action, and out of the dust etc. Although the track through the scenic area is just an Up & Down with a branch and small yard, the gyrus below will be four tracks, all going the same way – it’s a sorting system. A clever junction with fly-over sorts traffic to the outside and up to the scenic area into more realistic two-way traffic. This is to represent, outside a four-lane Up & Down fast and Up & Down Relief/Goods. There will be three types of track used. Hidden and outside will be all standard Peco Streamline Code 100. The scenic OO will be the new Peco Code 75 Bullhead, and of course the branch will be custom P4.
    At the moment, I’m collecting items, probably rather too many, but I can easily thin them out later. Nearly all the OO will be RTR. The P4 will be nearly all kits and scratchbuilds. All the buildings will be scratchbuilt, but, mercifully, they are actually very few, with two stations and four road overbridges.
    Once the outbuilding is erected, my plan is to make the baseboards in sections. One day I will keel-over, and having seen some very nice layouts ripped to shreds after someone dies or moves, I’d like to give the layout at least a fighting chance of survival. Thus – the ‘standard’ sections will probably be 3’ x 6’. Possibly smaller, as remember they are on two levels. I will make some test-sections and heft them to see if I need to reduce them further to cut weight. I will do the inside layout first, since the garden section is the icing on the cake for me, and a summer-only task.
    All of the layout will be DCC, and all the OO points and signals DCC too. The P4 section will be manual DCC train, but have manual points and signals by rods and cables, just to keep it more ‘prototypical’ – and because it amuses me…..!
     
    Compromise;- Compromise, some say, is odious, however, in modelling, everything is about compromise. Certainly OO is a compromise. It’s really something that should have been dropped years ago, when Hornby Dublo three-rail went out, but here we are, in 2018, still saddled with it. Of course – the manufacturers should have go their act together decades ago to either go HO or to the correct P4 gauge at least. In fact, I read somewhere that during the war – this was agreed, and I’m given to understand that they proposed what was effectively a P4 Coarse and P4 Fine as the way forwards, but like many things, it never happened. What a pity – so we have to live with what we have.
    One of the subtle precipitants in my return to railway modelling was the most excellent aforementioned Peco Code 75 Bullhead. It really transforms OO, compared with the now very coarse-looking Peco Streamline FB Code 100. True, there is as yet a small availability of points/turnouts, but it’s still a huge leap for OO – and together with some of the excellent modern RTR, gives OO a new lease of life for UK modellers. Hats-off to Peco then. To my great surprise, on my little test section, any and all of my very eclectic collection of locos will run on it, some of which date back to the early 1960’s.
    Almost all of my nasty tight curves will be hidden out of sight, but in order to shoehorn a real place into the space available, I’ve had to create a plan that ‘bends’ reality. I don’t like doing it, but it’s literally the ONLY way I can fit things in – and I don’t take such compromises lightly either. All the lengths and widths etc will be to correct 4mm scale, so no shortening of sidings, loops or stations etc.
     
    *** Operationally, all the OO will be automatic – and the P4 manual. Since the actual infrastructure never changed until the branch was scrapped in the ghastly 1960’s, I can operate several time-periods. I have trains that will represent pre-Great War late Victorian – early Edwardian, then between wars, then lastly, the final period up to Nationalisation. I have also been creating collections of figures and vehicles etc, so that I can have a tray for each period, and swap those details when I run different eras of train. I’m not going to be ultra-slavish about this, but Armstrong 517’s and Metro Tanks with polished brass domes – and 1930’s – ‘40’s vehicles and figures would look really daft – as would a Hawkworth County with Victorian figures and all horse road traffic.
    If I’m really honest, over the last twelve months some of my tastes have changed. There is WAY more variety of designs and liveries Pre-Grouping, by a huge margin. Added to that, everything was normally kept clean and tidy – so very little need to spoil good models with ‘weathering’. (Someone will make a living in years to come cleaning-up all these ‘Weathered’ models…!).
     
    I have to plead almost complete ignorance to DCC, other than having learnt the basic principles. I have been collecting Lenz equipment. My original preference was for the Bachmann infra-red remote system - the display is large and informative. However, I started to see adverse comment on the web with regard to problems of IR range, and, given the type and size I planned, constantly losing connection would have rendered the system useless. Also – since DCC was originated by Lenz, I have presumed that it will offer the best shared compatibility. I have no idea if this theory will be born-out in practice however…! Some have commented that the Lenz hand-controls are a bit dated, but it’s not very relevant for me. None of it is new – but it does seem to be tried and tested. Please bear in mind that I will only be ‘driving’ trains on the smaller P4 branch, and the OO should run off a PC program - that's the theory at any rate...!
    Sounds;- This is another one of the advances that attracted me back to have another go after so long. It’s not new. In the late 1960’s, a friend lent me an American ‘Big-Boy’ Garret-type loco to play with. This was superb, and had full sound – and it was as good as, if not better than some current UK models I’ve heard. I’m not a diesel fan, but I have to say that the model diesels have been transformed by sound. It works very well for them. I suspect more internal room allows for a bigger speaker – as well as a better resonant-chamber etc. Thus far, apart from some amazing German models, the UK steam locos with sound have left me greatly underwhelmed. Not that I’ve seen that many, but they seem quiet, scratchy and very tinny. To add insult to injury, DCC sound decoders are also insanely expensive. I have about 100 locos, so that equates to about £10,000.00 if I fitted them all with a DCC sound decoder/chip. For £10,000.00, I could hire a coterie of naked ladies to dance around making suitable noises for double the enjoyment and half the price. Ten Grand..? Naaa……some lateral thinking is required I think. (More anon.).
    As for locos and stock – almost every item is used – some of it very well used. It ranges from ancient Triang to latest Hornby, Dapol, Heljan and Rapido. For the P4, it’s mostly kits. Most are used, that I will convert/rebuild. There wasn’t much choice with some items. For example – I have a collection of relatively rare and poorly made K’s LNWR six-wheeled coaches. I will strip and rebuild and repaint these. It’s fair to say that modern RTR looks better than any kit-built models, with very few exceptions. I have seen a few RTR with new chassis converted to P4 – so that’s another option. I have bought a fair number of old kit locos to ‘process’ in this way – mainly for the P4. To be honest however, I’m not very confident that I can get very close to some of the modern Bachmann….., but if one wants to run a few older Victorian items, it’s pretty-much Hobson’s choice…..
     
    So there we have it. A first blog post – ever. I shan’t be blogging very often you may be relieved to hear, but I thought that, for those interested – and masochistic enough to read my verbiage, it’d provide a starting-point to understanding from whence this odd project sprang. It’s all an accident really – and an exercise in pragmatism. I'm still on a very steep learning curve - and will be for some time. Expect me to ask some really dumb questions - for which I'd like to apologise in advance....!
    If any of you have dabbled in this dark and diabolical mixture of 4mm OO & P4 on the same layout, I’d be very interested to hear about it. Nor do I mind thoughts or comments, whether positive or negative. I hope that you have found the above interesting or at least amusing.
  12. Methuselah
    Outer-Space may be infinite - and when it comes to modelling, it seems very much a case of 'much wants more'. I started-off with a very vague, naive idea of making use of perhaps around 10' x 16' - a not inconsiderable space it seemed at the time. To house this, I was going to reconstruct a derelict outbuilding in the front garden. The problem was, that new plans/ideas required it to grow....quite a lot, to the point where it was going to risk plunging my house into the inky darkness of perpetual night.... That is how I ended-up refocussing on rebuilding another derelict building in the back yard where my newly reborn building would only serve to improve the Stygian gloom of what might pass, quite literally, for a scene from a Dickens novel. I have some flexibility available, as the existing run of buildings allow for a depth of around 12' - 15'. The length available is around 40', perhaps 50' at a push. However, I'm obviously unlikely to live long enough to fill that all with a finished detailed railway....well, one has to be realistic....! Thus the eventual size is not yet exactly fixed. I'm trying really hard to devise a plan which distorts 'reality' the least. I've had to make two compromises which will be familiar to all model-railway builders ;-

    1) I've had to 'bend' the reality for the diorama, so that it can wind it's way around the building, and
    2) I've had to accept some modest foreshortening. In this latter case, all of the stations, loops and sidings will remain to scale in length, but the sections between the Branch stations will be vastly reduced - and 'bent' as required. Needs must.
     
    Another issue is the height of the layout relative to the ground-level - and whilst not a unique consideration, it's especially important in my case, since the outside OO lines will head-off down the garden, which has a slope on it. The elevated track must therefore start-out as low as practicable, in order for the lowest part of the garden not to require absurdly tall elevation....and/or an unacceptable gradient to enter the building from the garden. Even allowing for the garden trackwork to be elevated a nominal maximum of around 2' - 3' above ground-level the building will have a floor at ground-level with no step-up. If I have to sink the building partly below ground-level, then we are into serious 'tanking' to keep the water and damp out - and having done some on previous building-projects, I'm none to keen...! At the moment, there seems to be only two options ;- a) Accept the garden section at a considerable elevation, or b) Lower the floor of the new building. The latter works better, but that means building the new structure will involve the aforementioned 'tanking' it to keep the damp out. I've had to use this method of several buildings in the past, and it's a real pain in the Harris. This latter option will also result in a very odd-looking building - unless I just make it into a sort of semi-cellar. Compromise therefore looms.

    It's clear that some sort of gradient is inevitable. The planned garden route will allow for a 'Licky Incline' of scale length, albeit with a curve at the bottom end to fit it into the garden, so the incline will have a slight 'L'-shape. I think I will have serious problems if this is too steep - and I'm so out of touch that I have little idea as to what is realistic to expect the locos to cope with. The real Lickey Incline, according to Wikipedia, has a gradient of 1:37.7 or 26.5% or 1.52 degrees, and I'm certainly not going to allow my incline to exceed this. The distance of the Lickey Incline is 2 miles, or 138.9' in 4mm scale/1:76. The construction of the garden run shouldn't take long, but it's will be the last element in the greater plan. Plenty of time then, to do some tests to see what locos can actually manage - and retain at least some sort of reserve. I'll not digress here into the area of locos, except to say that from my little tests thus far, some of them would struggle to pull much, even on the level....! Reworking or disposal may be the only option is such cases.

    I mentioned in my first blog that the layout inside the outbuilding will be split-level. The lower level will be at the entrance/exit level of the garden lines. It is a storage and sorting level. This will connect internally to the main Gyrus and all of the (Many) storage loops. Most of the interior trackwork will be at this level, hidden behind a curtain. Spurring off these loops will be the inclines to, and from, the upper, scenic level. Again - some experimentation will be required to establish a maximum usable gradient, but the internal gradient will not be normally visible and much easier to keep clean than the outside one of course.
    On the scenic upper level, the OO mainline crosses through the junction with the P4 Branch and is then quadroupled for a distance, allowing the Relief loops to take slower trains and for fast trains to pass in both a northwards and southwards direction as per the real location, although today, at the real location, only the northward loop remains, along with a crossover. If you have been brave enough to follow my inane ramblings thus far, it will be clear that most of the actual track footage will be either on the lower level inside - or externally in the garden. All of this footage is likely to be sourced from the most economical option, Peco Code 100. As well as being cheaper when new, there are vast amounts of this available cheaply secondhand, often unused or in near perfect condition. As I've said before - the scenic OO section (Only.) will be Peco Code 75 Bullhead. This new range is rapidly expanding, and I think Peco are onto a real winner with it, as it fills a real longstanding requirement. I'm very fortunate that this superb product is available right when I need it.

    From a modelling point of view, the junction will, in essence, consist of an OO mainline, junction and goods yard, with the P4 element of the branch, slicing through and across the OO mainline to it's own separate bay platform with loop etc on the west side of the Junction. The theory is that the different gauges will not be too obvious, and for the most part, the original operation of the main and branch lines can be followed quite happily. Yes it's a compromise, but if opens-up a whole world of usability and effectively 'squares the circle'.

    I won't reveal the actual location that I'm modelling just yet, as the description of that, it's history, and what still remains, can form another future blog post, but given that I've already stated that the main line was a north-south GWR/LNWR-LMS Joint, some readers will soon figure it out I'm sure...suffice it to say that whilst the Branch was, like many, culled in the 1960's, the main line is still very much alive, and almost all of the buildings at the junction are still intact today, albeit mostly put to different uses.

    As well as the details and history of the locations modelled, I will bash-out a couple of blogs on locos & stock, and another on the systems and operation. This latter subject is one where I will be coping with the steepest leaning curve, as whilst I know what I want - I have very little idea, thus far as to how to achieve my desired aims...! There is a lot to learn and re-learn...

    A simple example of my current level of stupefying ignorance is the design of baseboard. I know I need to keep the weight and therefore the size down. However, I also wish to attain quiet-running without the old childhood 'roar' to drown-out the expensive sound-effects. My current thought is 3' x 6' boards, with a 3/4" x 3" frames and topped with 5mm ply. I had been inclining to weatherproof MDF, but then I read a number of comments online about modellers baseboards suffering distortion owing to damp. I think this is unlikely if the quality of the MDF is good, but I'd rather not take the risk.
    Speaking to some experienced P4 modellers, they seem to favour running their scenic area track on a foam base. I've also gleaned from the web the importance of trying to keep the track sonically insulated from the baseboard. Trackpins seem to be a 'no-no', but then I always used to pull them all out after the glue had dried anyway. Quite how one then fixes the track, keeping it in place - but lightly, I'm presently unclear. What I do remember however, is that granite ballast, after glueing sets like real concrete...! I need to know how to achieve quiet running - but without compromising the scale-like appearance of the track. Yet another steep learning curve for me....and no doubt many idiotic mistakes await me...!
  13. Methuselah
    Now be kind, dear reader, - this old fool is on a vertical learning-curve...!
    Just over a year ago, when I 'accidentally' embarked (Put it down to a lack of self-control...!) on this project, I had no locos whatsoever - absolutely zip - not even the twinkling of an eye. I now have well over a hundred, and it would be hard to imagine a more eclectic collection - and no, they are not all expensive locos. Many were dirt cheap.

    OO;- Most, perhaps 80%, of the OO locos are RTR, albeit modified in some cases.

    P4;- The P4 locos are either RTR suitable for conversion (Few.), or, more usually, kits converted or 'to convert' to P4, a few are EM with already compensated chassis, so I hope relatively easy conversions to P4.

    With the exception of the GW Diesel Railcars, they are all steam, since I'm only interested in pre-1947.

    Diesel;- There will be GWR Diesel Railcars in both gauges. However, I have, for entirely practical reasons, acquired a small fleet of diesel-prototypes from the BR era. These are my 'Mules' for track testing. I chose these for a number of mainly practical reasons;-

    They do not have delicate details to be easily broken. To save wear & tear on the steam types. They have lots of wheels and therefore adhesion. (More anon....) They are very simple mechanically. They are easy to maintain & modify. They are cheap as chips.


    I chose the Mainline early green Type 4, 1Co-Co1 / Type 40/45 (I'm a bit confused on that...!), as I was lucky enough to find several that were NOS (new-old-stock). This was primarily because they have a lot of wheels - (......and of all the diesels, these were a type that I often used to travel behind many years ago, on late night mail trains. I think the tickets must have been cheaper...!). However - I don't actually have any affinity with non-steam whatsoever - these 'Mules' will have to work hard to 'prove' the trackwork. Now - the more modern/diesel-oriented reader will immediately realise that despite appearances, these models really only have a small four-wheel driven part of only one bogie. Typically, I didn't realise this..! (Doooh..!) so there may well be much more suitable 'Mules' out there, waiting for me to discover them. My plan for my 'Mk.I Mules', was, if necessary, to put two motor-bogies in each shell and fill the rest of the shell with lead-shot. Two ran OK, but a third used example ran poorly, so I took it apart to service the motor. It ran better afterwards, but it did reveal what a Heath-Robinson design they are.

    Generally, I have been very impressed with the modern RTR - and this was really what originally drew me back into railway modelling. Apart from the obvious improvement in scale-appearance over nearly fifty years, it's the vastly improved running that has been most noticeable. The modern Hornby locos seems pretty good, the Bachmann - even better. Both are generallysmooth and quiet - and that's even before adding DCC.

    Then there are what I term as 'Middle-Aged' locos, such as older Hornby, Lima & Mainline etc. I suppose these were produced very roughly between the late 1970's to around 2005. These seem to be quite good scale-wise - especially the Mainline. However, these latter locos do seem to run very very weakly (-and noisily...!) for some reason - and I may have to look at the possibility of re-motoring these if practicable, as they usually look pretty good otherwise. Types with congenital problems will need to be weeded-out and disposed-of.

    Finally there are the real oldies.... Now some may think it rather odd that I would even countenance running these when I have modern OO, let alone P4 running too. Here I would refer folks back to the original concepts that I'm striving to meet;- The OO is primarily for outdoors - where running scale-length trains and entertainment are the prime objectives. - ie; The 'impression' and practicality are uppermost. For these locos, power and reliability are paramount, but they will be variously upgraded insofar as it is practical to do so - and they'll all be DCC - fitted.
    It'll be tough on the locos outside too, and the old ones are dead-easy to maintain. It's dirtier outside - and then there will be the unavoidable gradient. Poor scale attributes aside - and the fact that some are rather noisy (Less of an issue outside.), many of those old locos are real sloggers. For example, I have an old Hornby Dublo 8F, re-wheeled with Romfords and upscaled with added detail. That's ideal, it's got power, weight and lots of wheels, - so lots of real grip. Some of the OO are metal kits, and those too have the weight to get some decent grip. Weight is a biggie, after all, and it was the only reason the old 'singles' worked at all. (Don't get me going on Singles...).

    The P4 locos are nearly all kits with just a few converted/convertable RTR thrown-in. They will not have to contend with the dirt, gradients and long trains that the OO locos will, and the Branch will also be much slower paced, with - probably - mechanical point operation and signalling. All the rest - the OO, indoors and outside, will be electronically-controlled, via a PC. I have some very interesting locos that I'd really like to make P4, but there is no historical precedent on the Branchline for doing so. That said - I have heard, anecdotally, that an errant Castle used the Branch during the war - but I have not seen any documentary evidence for that unusual event....!

    Hardly any of the non-RTR are actually truly scratch-built. They are either kits or what I term my 'Chimera', which are built from a mixture of kit, RTR and scratch assemblies. One example of the latter for example is an LMS Crab, which has an etched chassis, a Bachmann 'body' and a Hornby tender. It sounds odd, but is actually an excellent loco.

    Of course, my original intent was that one lonesome GWR loco for the mantlepiece...... Now things have broadened-out a lot, fuelled by the freedom the garden railway offers - and my own unbridled capriciousness. There will now be many trains that could in no way be genuinely justified in the scenic area, but make a very nice rolling display of their own in the garden. This would include Caledonian, GNR, LNER and Southern - although the latter Grouping hasn't materialised - yet. I can foresee other colourful arrivals such as Chatam Wainrights and some LBSC perhaps.
    This sudden plurality of interest has quite surprised me. This more diverse strand seems to have one primary limitation, and that is the lack of realistic appropriate RTR stock for some of the old Pre-Grouping companies. Of course I can built kits or even scratchbuilt, but we are back in conflict with the big bogie of time again..... So whilst I am building (some.) locos and stock for the OO part of this scheme, I will always go for RTR - or ready-built kits if I possibly can.
    I have to say that the average built-up kits that I have acquired are pretty poorly made. Some of the more irredeemable locos will be sold-on. I will only keep those requiring modest remedial work.
    In some cases, knuckling-down to building is really the only option - but I have to ration these. For example, I have a DJH kit for a Midland Fowler 0-10-0 'Big Bertha' for that garden 'Lickey Incline', as well as a number of otherwise unobtainable Singles of the GWR, LNWR & MR etc.

    I'm as yet too inexperienced with current parts and assemblies to make any serious assessment of motors and gearboxes etc. There are a lot of older kit-built locos out there. Perhaps around a third run terribly, if at all, perhaps a similar percentage run well-enough for pulling, but have very poor starting/slow-running performance. Less than a third might be describes as 'good', and none thus far as 'excellent'. Clearly, a good motor, a well built gearbox and a suitable gear ratio are paramount before one even looks at fangled electrickery.
    One thing that has puzzled me is that I haven't seen any mention of the use of Coreless motors. I wonder why....? These are commonplace in model aircraft, drones and boats.

    I have alluded earlier to Singles. These are a particular peccadillo that I have developed with my rediscovered interest in model railways. I have a couple of dozen of one sort or another. These range from the dear old Triang types, through modified versions, through kits, to the latest - yet to be delivered - Locomotion Stirling RTR. This latter gains additional traction from a powered rear axle-set. What it will pull remains to be seen, but the single-axle drivers are very limited in what they will pull. I'm planning to add as much weight to the locos as possible to ameliorate this issue. I have examples for the GWR, LMS, LNWR, Midland and Caledonian and await the GNR Stirling with great anticipation.

    Finally, - DCC. This is all new to me, and as I've touched on elsewhere, I have collected some Lenz gear. This on the basis that it was the originator, it's German, - so it'll be well made, and it generally also has a good reputation.
    The decoders - at least basic non-sound examples, now seem to be quite cheap. The sound-decoders are quite another matter. Whilst the small speakers seem basically cheap, the sound-decoders themselves are crazy prices. For this reason, I have been speaking to some contacts with regard to - just perhaps - producing my own. I'm certainly not going to spend £10,000 or more just on decoders. Of course, this may well be a complete non-starter, but don't bet on it..... Can they be produced..? Of course. Can they be made small-enough to a price..? ..ummmm maybe. Can they be produced economically..? No idea whatsoever....yet. My target is to get them under 50% of the cost of the commercially-available examples - but I'm in no mad rush. I'm still hoping that someone else will get some cheaper ones made and save me the hassle....!
    The P4 Branch, may just possibly, remain analogue, as operation is so simple, but the rest is intended to be automated DCC.
    I have downloaded an App' that I have on all my Apple devices, which is called 'TouchCab'. I have Wi-Fi boosters anyway, so all of my property, including all of the garden, falls well within good Wi-Fi coverage. This means that, in theory at least, I can use my Mac, iPad or iPhone anywhere on site to effect basic control via the interface on the Lenz System which I have already acquired. As yet, I do not know if the TouchCab can cope with the automation itself - or whether I will need additional software. At the moment my plan is to built a section of the upper, scenic level of the layout for testing locos and the Lenz DCC system to get a feel for what is achievable. As I have mentioned previously, I'd originally fancied the very well-presented Bachman system, but there was a plethora of comments online to the effect that the Bachman's control range was very limited, even indoors, which would be of no use to me whatsoever, sadly, as the system looks very user-friendly.
    How then, will the final design operate? My intention is that the laptop will run the OO network rather like one uses iTunes or similar. That is to say there will be various playlists. Each train will be called-out of its dedicated loop in turn, and returned there afterwards, just like a tune being played. The trains themselves will be set-pieces, and will stay coupled normally. The P4 will probably be three/screw-link for simplicity and aesthetics. I haven't finally decided for the OO yet. I'd ideally like to go three-link, but that's a lot of very fiddly work, and messing with all the stock will devalue it, especially if the toy couplings will no longer fit back on. I'll probably just leave most as they are. The intention is that the train and it's constituents will reflect the typical load for that loco in that period, as it is liveried.
    The P4 Branch is fairly simple. I'm hoping that I can arrange some basic interlocking so that when the signals are changed to allow a branch train to cross the main-line, this will trigger the main-line trains to stop automatically - or prevent the signals moving if a train is already in the block etc. With relatively few trains in the main OO lines on the upper, scenic level, I doubt that this will present a major issue.
    The main gyrus on the lower level is four-tracks. There will be no points outside whatsoever, and about 95% of all the points will be associated with the storage-loops on the lower, gyrus level. The main running lines will have only three junction areas. One will be the exit & return for the garden lines. The second and third will be to launch & recovery points from the storage loops inside the main gyrus.
    However, to keep it entertaining in the garden, since it's quite long, the garden-loop ideally needs to be able to cope with several trains running on any loop at any given time. Let's say, for the sake of discussion, there is an outbound, a return, and one inside the building, so three. That means the PC-based program will have to keep them separate. This might be via speed modulation or stopping - depending on how clever the PC program is. Clearly, if some sort of simple block is in operation, then trains cannot enter the block ahead if the preceding train has not cleared it.
    There is only one pair of lines up to and down from, the scenic section. This will be fed from a separate inner gyrus on the lower level, still with access to the main storage loops, so that trains called-off for the scenic section do not have to cross the main gyrus which runs around the outside, so less conflict and less pointwork. One side of this inner gyrus will have 180-degree loops to the scenic section to ape two-way running, but in reality, all the gyrus lines will run clockwise. This keeps both trackwork and control much simpler, as electrically, there is no reversal.
    How the DCC will cope with the garden loops I have no idea. I'm working on the presumption that I will need a regular boost-points to keep-up the energy supply. Clearly - this is an issue that others, imbued with greater wisdom than I, will have faced and resolved, as many can be seen running on You Tube, so I am hoping that some kindly souls will remedy my paucity of knowledge.
    There seem to be many unknowns. For example;- Would a rake of lit coaches noticeably reduce the performance of the loco....? Would this require more closely-spaced boost-points......surely it must.....? Likewise, the use of sound and lights on the loco must use more energy, albeit quite small.

    I've basically got all the locos I want now, and all the faffing-about with the kits and rebuilds will have to wait until I have got the basic set-up operational. In the meantime, I am setting-about a couple of boards set into a loop to allow setting-up and testing of the fangled electronics. More as and when I get that running....
  14. Methuselah
    As I have previously alluded, I have been a returnee to railway modelling only since the beginning of last year. So what have I achieved thus far....? Well - I've spent far too much money for a start off...! I have a mountain of boxes which contain a dizzying miscellany - primarily the result of starting from zero, - and I have become, at least a little, better-informed, well, - arguably...
    My original target of a train on the mantle gestated into a vague idea of some sort of 10' x 6'....until the realities of scale set-in...... Thus - having bought basically all the stock etc I need, I have had to focus on building the railway. The first priority being somewhere to actually put the darned thing...! I did look at building it inside the house, but that was clearly a non-starter. Next, I looked at converting space in an old cider-mill apple loft, but again, the realities of space indicated too many compromises - and being on the first floor really messed-up my plans for an extension out into the garden. Back to the drawing-board..... The last options were to rebuild an old building in the front garden - but again the footprint was too small - or to extend & rebuild an old woodshed in the back yard. However - like many things in life, this isn't as simple as it sounds, as the ground has a slope on it, and this requires a lot of excavation for a retaining wall and footings. Thus - having hired a small excavator for some other jobs anyway, it was put to work with my old dumper 'Duggie' - and most of the basic earth was removed, save a margin that awaits the flowering of some Iris's before they can be rescued. (This is after the demolition of an old porch was delayed by Blue Tits, themselves delayed by the poor Spring weather. Even the ducks on the pond are late, so I'm merely 'going with the flow'...!).
    Whilst there is then a short delay on clearing the site, I have been trying to decide on how best to build using all of the available space - and yet not spending astronomical amounts of cash. Fortunately, I have plenty of bricks, thanks to the demise of some old farm buildings. That said, brickwork needs bigger, more expensive footings - as well as copious insulation. Keeping an open mind, I've been considering a timber-framed structure, metal-clad to the rear and roof at the least, on a substantial 6"x2" framework. This would be clad in shuttering-plywood both sides of the framework and packed with insulation - the main house uses almost 12" of insulation. The plan is to also utilise the new roof to mount a solar-panel array.
    This will be a rather odd building in several ways, as it's front will have an overhanging-roof to double as more log-storage, and much of it will be windowless, as it's warmer, more secure, and mostly in shadow anyway. One section at the end, where it's much lighter, will have a raised-floor to allow the lower-level lines out into the garden. This area will be fashioned in the style of a signal-cabin, with windows on two sides, and one side having sliding-panels to access the main layout via a swing-out section of lines and down a coupe of steps to the main building level. (The raised 'cabin' will contain all of the controls for the OO lines and will have line-of-sight down the 'Lickey Incline' into the garden. The P4 branch, which will not be suitable for automation, will be locally controlled from the line-side by plug-in points about halfway down the building.).
    My current problem is trying to maximise the depth of the building - yet not get involved with time-consuming and expensive revetment. If I go for a 45 degree bank - I'll save money, but lose too much space. A concrete or blockwork revetment will save space, but use-up time and money.
    The benefit of maximising the available space should be that I can lay most of the main-line with the scale lengths and curves. There will be one 'warping of reality' to 'bend' the diorama through 180 degrees at the end of the building, via a six or seven-foot radius curve, but that's the only concession. If it offends my eyes too much when laid I may simply hide it under a tunnel.
    I always view model railways rather like the old Christmas globes with Santas in liquid and snow in them. As children - we always used to be fascinated by that whole microcosm contained in little more than a wine-glass which came to life when we shook it. It's magic you see.....
     
    Methuselah.
     
    NB;-
     
    First Image; The site of the north-western end - the 'cabin' will sit roughly where the pile of junk and cuttings are.
     
    Second Image; The NW end and mid-section. The SE end of the building will replace the old woodshed, the end masonry of which can be seen on the right margin of this image.
     
    (The photos are a little deceptive, as the full length will be approximately 50'. The width is dependant on the rivetement used, but around 12' - 15' is likely.).
  15. Methuselah

    8. A Bridge Too Far.

    By Methuselah,

    It's taking me a while to get my plans detailed. I'd put up my drawings, but they have been changing/evolving with embarrassing regularity. I've laid down some pretty hard qualifiers - and they are proving very difficult to meet. Of course, I realise that I'm being too idealistic. For the most part, real railways don't have a lot in the way of sharp curves, and my chosen locations reflect that. This is good because my building is long and straight....! So far so good.
    The rub is, that as I got greedier, I added more real-estate, and now I'm right at the limit of the real-world real-eastate I can utilise... However - to keep the existing bridges in the correct locations as scenic-breaks means that I've really gone 'a bridge too far'. One less bridge leaves me with a wide four-track, three-span brick bridge - hard to disguise as a tunnel or scenic-break. One more gets me back to two tracks, really but I'm overshooting length-wise - which is the planning juncture that I'm at.
     
    I''d laid-down a 'rule' that I'd (Ideally.) neither foreshorten nor 'bend' reality just to get it to fit - and now I'm faced with exactly that. I am modelling .63 miles, or about 1 kilometre of mainline - at 1/76 that's just over 13 metres...and I have 14m max..... Everything else fits fine, as the P4 branch-line sections are well within the limits of the available space.
    Obviously, the OO mainline can turn tightly past the scenic-breaks out of view, but I'm still struggling. It's very frustrating after already opting for quite a long extension to the building. If I go for what would be, in RTR terms, a 3rd & 4th radius respectively to the hidden ends of the layout, my outer track would have a centre-line radius of 572, call it 600, or approx' 1,200mm of space needed beyond the bridges. I'll find a way to wangle the last 200mm or so, as it's sooooo close. There is a utility at one end of the woodshed that I may be able to penetrate locally just to wangle the last bit - or might just be able to add it onto the other end. I'll find a way.
     
    One of my last 'tweaks' has been to turn the whole layout basically through 180 degrees. One might think this was little help, but this has used the slant across the room to give me a few more inches. This up-ending of the whole set-up has also made access to the inside of the layout a bit less problematic too.
     
    Now that things seem to have settled, I'll use the next Blog to introduce the location being modelled - but below is what the location looks like in modern times.
×
×
  • Create New...