mjcampbell

When I was a young child my Dad got me a train-set for Christmas, and before long he'd laid the track onto a couple of pieces of chipboard which could be got our occasionally. Over the years it evolved in size, eventually circumnavigating the whole loft - a good run in that house. Gradually I had taken over with track-laying and adding buildings, though I never got it properly sceniced it laid the foundations for the hobby, and by my teens I was building "proper" layouts myself. A few years ago we got our son a train-set for Christmas - Thomas of course! I knew that laying the track on carpet would be a fast route to frustration so built a folding base-board to slide under his bed. A couple of years later I added a second circuit - as he had more trains, and so his younger sister could join in. It worked fine, except the long siding on the inner track caused the inner track radius to go too tight. The board was a bit small for bigger and more exiting trains though. However about a year ago we moved house, and in the summer I decorated his new room, he also got a new bed which didn't allow for the board to go underneath. I had promised him a bigger and better layout though, so that's where this story starts!

I've never seen a survey, or compared the membership of the relative societies, but 009 is definitely more common at shows and in magazines. Over on the NGRM forum there are boards for 4mm scale (predominantly 009) with 626 topics, and 7mm scale (including 14 and 16.5mm gauge) with 348 topics. 3.5mm scale (164) and 1/4" scale (140) are separate. Whether that is a representative barometer I don't know!

That seems a little negative. The fact that we are still getting updates from Heljan 18 months after the project was first announced suggests they have invested a lot already, and are unlikely to back out at this stage. In addition PECO have announced more products in 009, so their initial venture with the L&B stock must be paying off nicely - and that's before there's an RTR loco to go with them! And Bachmann are planning to enter the 009 market. As for minimum production runs, Minitrains are clearly thriving with new HOe (and 009-ish) models but I doubt their production runs are near 5000. Several SG models have been released in recent years with (initial at least) production runs much smaller than that. Modern CAD/CAM manufacture of the moulds seem to make viable quantities way below what they where even 10 years ago. I'm not sure that Heljan are even taking pre-orders, though retailers are advertising them. Anyway I'm sure Heljan have done their homework and will know it's a viable venture without having to threaten customers with having to pre-order.

Great to see some progress, that is perhaps the neatest layout support I have ever seen...

Just raise the ground in the fore-ground - a layer of foamboard or polystyrene?

Please don't scrap the layout without seeing if someone is interested first - it's too good for that! Get in touch with the 009 society sales, offer it on here and on the NGRM forum, for example.

Check out Halling chassis: http://www.halling.at/en/Accessories/Drives I've got a couple of 9mm gauge Variodrive units and they are superb runners, with double flywheels they are slow, smooth, and powerful. The only thing is, they are short on wheels for a J70, but given the skirts perhaps you can live with that.

Very nice modelling, and so instantly recognisable as Brighton in architecture and scenery.

Cool! There's a handy how-to guide for painting nameplates on the Narrow Planet Website.

We took the baby buggy with us when picking our last car!

I have a more advanced version of the tea tray, where most of my modelling gets done!

I'm no expert, but I'd say definitely at B, and probably at A if wagons may be left in that side of the loop. Or have just one (real or imaginary!) further "left" to cover both lines.

I prefer it too, as the engine shed is accessible without recourse to the goods siding. The issue with the first plan is that if the goods siding were "private" (military) and fenced-off/gated the shed would be inaccessible without entering private property, unless of course the shed were for a private loco in which case I'd expect the shed to be within the fence. It also means you need to clear wagons from the siding to get in the shed ... apologies if this is babbling, I trust you get my drift! The other option would be a "K" point arrangement, where the sidings both branch from facing points in the loop line and cross each other using a diamond crossing, but that is hard to arrange with commercial track and has wiring implications. Would make for interesting track-work though!

We'll convert you to Narrow Gauge yet...

Worsley works do some scratch-aid etches, mostly coaches: http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/NG/NG_Isle_of_Man_Railways.htm Peco HOm 12mm gauge track should be convenient. For questions about NG railways it is worth checking out the NGRM forum too.

Well, holding down Alt and pressing Print Screen takes an image of the active window only, I can hardly read those screenshots... Did you un-install the program first? Even if you did, they sometimes don't un-install every component, .dll, registry setting, etc. There are programs that do a "deep clean" removal for you, I've used Revo uninstaller before but I'm sure there are others. I should point out I am no expert on such matters, other than the frustration of similar events!

I found long, yellow, static grass fibres a passable representation of straw. This is 7mm scale, but I'm sure it would work fine for 4mm with medium fibres. On the other hand I wonder if straw would be used in an open wagon for a load like this, it would blow away and/or get wet so wouldn't be very effective. I'd have thought simple wooden slats and wedges would have done the job, perhaps with rope too.

Yes of course, that is the intention. But when you start to move the lower magnets I think the lateral force will be stronger and more immediate. Rather like moving something held between your fingers rather than balanced on a finger. But this is just theorising!

I wonder whether introducing a deliberate offset between the magnets would help - so that those below the board are either wider or narrower than the spacing of those under the traverser deck. They could even be angled. The reason is this should introduce a horizontal aspect to the attractive force, to be in equilibrium the deck should centralise to the magnets below. If two magnets are aligned there is no horizontal force (just a vertical "attractive" force) until one of the magnets is moved out of alignment, then they will want to re-align - the force will increase with the offset, but there could be a certain ammount of offset until the force is strong enough to move the traverser. Once the stiction (starting friction) is overcome the traverser will "catch up", but as the magnet stops the momentum may not be checked until the magnet has overrun enough to generate a reverse force. This could possibly lead to a jerky motion. By deliberately offsetting the magnets there will always be a horizontal force - so as soon as the magnets start to move they are applying this force to the traverser, and should overcome any stiction or overrun. This is just a theory but could easily be tried in your mock up. If it doesn't make sense let me know and I'll try a diagram!

Coming together nicely. I can't help feeling there should be some dead space between the platform and the shop though - the platform running up to the back wall of the shop seems unlikely for several reasons! There will need to be a buffer stop (!) too, and then probably an inch or so of space, so the last couple of inches of platform is redundant. How about ending it in a wall or some steps, then a bit of waste ground? Or even a back yard?

Looks like a neat design. I'll be interested to see how well the magnetic traction works, I can foresee possible jerkiness. I guess plan B would be some slots hidden by the traverser rails with brackets coming through from the mechanism to the deck, but magnets would be much neater! Using the wheels for pickup should work fine, or if not some brass or p-b wipers on the rails hidden under the deck. I did that on a turntable once and it works fine.

A sheet of cheap hardboard might do the job - less creases and wrinkles than a mat.

Well, they used to be, Golden Arrow did etched kits but they are out of stock/production right now. I think it had an etched chassis too. Might be worth making contact to express interest. There is also a 3D print from Shapeways courtesy of prolific designer Tebee. I guess as usual the surface finish would take a little work, and you'd have to sort your own chassis. As the loco was outside framed that could be a challenge, the Roco HF110 or a Bachmann 08 shunter with a valve gear etch from RT models might be good starting points. Given it is such a popular line I'm surprised there aren't more options for W&L locos and stock, though Worsley Works do coach etches.

Simple wouldn't be half as much fun!

When the building was converted it is highly likely a layer of insulation was laid (for current building regs) then a new levelled floor on top - since there is plenty of height there would be no need to excavate. Also in the photos a layer of blue brick is just visible at the bottom, on many similar buildings this layer of (waterproof, pre-damp-proof course) brick is much taller. So your theory of a raised ground level is a good one, I reckon it could be 1 to 2 feet.