Harlequin

I'm not sure what the objection is to having accounts with Rails, PayPal or other big retailers. It's "mostly harmless"* and the normal way of doing business on the Internet these days. These systems are used more to move money than to hold money (or debt). * Let's say, "mostly harmless" because there is a small risk of your data being hacked but we have to trust these organisations to do everything possible to mitigate those risks. If they don't, the reputational damage of a hacking incident could be terminal for them! A phrase that springs to mind is, "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face!"

Hi Brian, There seems to be a lot of hidden track that might be difficult to access and pointwork above track below making point motors and wiring difficult to fit in. What is the separation, rail top to rail top, of the two levels? The intense track density in the station might be another reason why it looks like a train set.

Is Jimmy pondering that cylinder on Kneller Hall? Sorry Kevin, but it still looks wrong to me.

Hi Chilly, Why is it 12ft by 4ft? Will it be up against a wall on any or all of the sides? Is it fixed or does it need to be movable? Do you want realistic scenery? (If so, the tracks run too close to the edges everywhere...!) What is the purpose of the all the sidings in the middle in railway terms? (I.e. apart from being somewhere for rolling stock to stand.) Without purpose it might not be fun or satisfying to operate...

My suggestion is to go for Peco Code 75 flat bottom, if you possibly can - for all the reasons given above. I wouldn't worry about re-spacing the sleepers for two reasons: 1. Life is too short and 2. It's not feasible to re-space the sleepers through the turnouts so you get inconsistency in spacing (although someone will now say they have done exactly that, of course). Old locos with big flanges are a problem on Code 75 but it sounds like you don't have that many of them so maybe that's not such a big problem in practice. You can sell them on to recover part of the value and buy something new. Old rolling stock is easy re-wheel (in my experience, anyway) and that does two good things: 1. Your can keep your old stock running on your new improved trackwork and 2. Older stock often used plastic wheels, which you can now replace with metal ones for improved running. New metal wheel sets are easy to obtain from all the usual places.

I made a stab at some lever leads for your box based on St Enodoc's arrangement: The exact wording might not be quite right - that's almost as arcane as the signalling itself. And I haven't shown any locking info yet.

Yes, much simpler if Warren station just never had a lock bar there, if that's realistic or you say that it's not modelled for reasons of compression or maybe just apply Rule 1.

Erm, actually... Please sit down and have stiff drink before you read this... You need to ask someone more knowledgeable than me about whether a lock bar would be associated with the FPL in this location. (I think it probably would - like Moretonhampstead.) The lock bar prevents the points from being changed while a train is passing over them. If present, the stop signal would be in rear of the lock bar, which was usually 50ft long... (hopefully not inside your tunnel!) The bar might not be very visible in model form, but the cranks and fixings associated with it would be. I don't know if you relish the chance to model another detail or despair at the complexity of it all! Edit: Oops, you hate it, sorry!

I stand to be corrected but I reckon so.

I think that because both signals relate to the same points they would usually be close together ("co-located") and both close to the points to make interlocking easier. (Moretonhampstead is an exception to this.) And then, because the running signal reads to the straight ahead route and the disc reads to the route to the left (in to the loop), they would be arranged that way on the ground.

Think Moretonhampstead...

I'm afraid the NHS logo is not correct on the image Hornby have shown us so far. I'm sure the NHS would prefer the proper logo to be used, and it's a better design anyway! Should be like this: For more info see: https://www.england.nhs.uk/nhsidentity/identity-guidelines/nhs-logo/ I tried to contact Hornby directly about this but I couldn't get through. Maybe someone with a more direct connection could raise it?

"Experienced" - hmmm, yes, sort of, in some areas... Still lots to learn, though! You usually need to compress real world trackplans but this location is relatively compact already and I am imagining a scenic finescale model so at the moment I'm going to design a layout that's exactly to scale.

If there's a "dimmer" involved the "brightness" control of the LEDs is probably implemented by Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). That is, turning the LEDs on and off very fast and varying the amount of time they are on vs. off. So if the LEDs are not on full brightness it's more likely that a camera will pick up the on and off states, depending on the PWM frequency, the camera frame rate and "shutter speed". (I have the feeling that even on "full brightness" the PWM circuit will still turn the LEDs off for short periods, but I'm not sure about that.) The frequency of the PWM circuit doesn't have to be related to mains AC frequency at all. You can buy PWM LED dimmers with a range of frequencies, 100-400Hz are common but you can get much higher frequency dimmers specifically to avoid flicker with electronic cameras.

Hi John, I think you found a really picturesque little place in Oxenhope and it has given me some ideas for a 4mm scale exhibition layout set in the 30s. (By "exhibition" I mean a bit too big and complicated for one person to build at home...) It would be a very different proposition to your layout so I don't think it would tread on your toes. Would you mind if I posted a design in a separate thread here?

Hiding in the trees like that and up on it's toes it looks like a startled deer!

Yes indeed. Lots of variation is possible but I guess that further back in time things were more consistent. Bear in mind the date when the source photo was taken and the period you are modelling, which may be different. Just to clarify, my primary source (GWR Signalling practice, reproducing a 1907 GWR Painting Instructions document) says that the boss plate and the ball of the finial should be red and all other iron fittings, including the spectacle frame, should be black. And allowing for trying to assess colours from B&W photographs, I'm pretty sure I can see that pattern in many of the photos in the book - including one dated 1950 (Plate 12, Page 31).

You can stick with Oxenhope as a heritage scene and operate it any way you like! The heritage aspect surely gives you some leeway not to stick to strict railway procedures if you need some excuse. If you want to run a shunting puzzle in the yard while there are other operations going on elsewhere that's absolutely fine - on your railway every day could be a Gala day... P.S. If it were mine, I would set it in the 30s so that I could have those really serpentine sidings and I'd desperately try to get the water mill and the stream in somehow. But that reflects my preferences. You do whatever makes you happiest!

Hi Philip, On the old pattern, wooden-armed 4ft and 5ft running signal arms (which you show in your photos above): The upper, red spectacle is bigger to allow for the settlement of the boss plate on the arm stop over time. (The boss plate, the down rod and the balance weight at the bottom are all supported by the arm stop when the signal is resting in the Danger position. The spring in the arm stop would slowly become permanently compressed and it's fixings might move or loosen, resulting in the arm pointing slightly upwards and the spectacle slightly downwards.) The glazing was fixed into the front of the spectacle plate, which was basically just a length of angle iron bent to a curved B shape on a jig. A 1/4 inch by 1 inch steel strip was screwed to the back of the arm, about one to two inches from the end, to stop the wood splitting. It was painted white but either it or the screws rusted so there's often a rusty brown streak there. The front of the boss plate should be painted the same colour as the arm, i.e. red or yellow.

Hi again, You have everything under control, by the sound of it. I just stood a small prairie on a Peco Small Radius turnout to get an idea of your release spur and, yes, it will fit fine. I misjudged the length in your plan photo above. If you have insulated the frog rails, even leading into your sidings then, yes, that's exactly what you need to do for DCC. Good luck. I will follow with interest! Phil

This project seems to have come back to life! Rails are taking pre-orders: https://railsofsheffield.com/groups/3058/oo-gauge-water-towers

If it had been any other manufacturer promoting a DCC decoder with a similar image they would have been called out for it, and rightly so. This is valid and useful comment. I don't see Hornby in particular being bashed on this forum - except maybe in proportion to their market share, which might be expected. I wonder if confirmation bias is playing a part here???

Hi GWL, Code 75 track is a good choice IFF you intend to run modern stock on it. Older stock may have larger wheel flanges that may bump along the chairs. The loco release spur is worryingly short. Are you sure your largest intended loco will clear the points? The sidings are all very short. I'm sure you've got insulating joiners in the relevant places for DC. That will basically be fine for DCC too but with DCC you may want to keep sidings powered up while the points are against them and in that case you may need more insulated joints. If you haven't allowed for this don't worry, you can always slit the rails later on. Is your station at the end of a single or double track line? If single, like Clevedon was of course, then the plan suggests that the run round loop extends off scene and so why is the central crossover needed? The throw distance of the slider switch is probably not exactly the same as the throw of the points. So without an "omega loop" you may find that either the blades don't move properly or the wire-in-tube is under pressure from the switch, leading to potential mechanical failure in the future. Hope that's useful.

The trap at Oxenhope is actually a normal turnout leading to a stub siding so should be easy to model. If it was OO I’d be thinking about a double slip at that location to save space but I don’t know about N.

Hi Dene, Please draw your new plan to scale using accurate symbols for the turnouts so you can see what will, and will not, fit. My feeling is you’re going to have to drastically simplify the track plan and change the balance of scenic to fiddle yard length. You also have a really fundamental problem because your double track through station has, apparently, a single track connection to a single fiddle yard at one end.