Denbridge

I'll give you one, very basic, reason your plan will not work, aside from the fact it is effectively over ambitious and far too complicated. Gradients, especially gradients on curves. You state 10 coach+ trains. Most modern RTR locomotives will just slide to a halt. Simple as that

I would add that having a large shed doesn't mean it needs to be crammed full of track. Use space for trains to run in open countryside.

Most clubs would balk at building something this complicated, let alone an individual. Invariably projects such as this don't ever get finished or even substantially completed once the builder realises exactly how big the task is. And even if you did build it, do you have an army of operators to run it? If not, most of it would be effectively wasted space gathering dust. Then there is the cost factor, just count the number of turnouts, lengths of plain track, pointmotors etc, etc. That is before even considering the amount of stock required. Far too ambitious and impractical.

One concern I would have is to regard to the layouts location. From earlier descriptions I am guessing the building will be subject to fairly large climatic changes. That being the case, it would be even more desirable to be able to access as much as possible of the trackwork. In this respect #72 seems to achieve that. I'm not trying to deliberately put down ideas, just to try and advise from hard won experience of problems i've personally encountered.

I'm only speaking from my own experiences. Sooner or later hidden trackwork, particularly pointwork will cause problems and require more attention than can be achieved by access holes. One of the advantages of #72 is that the hidden 'triangle would be easily accessible via a scenic 'lid' over the trackwork. That long stretch of branch running behind the backscene could also prove problematical for access and maintenance.

at a cursory glance I would think thar 180 degree curveb looks pretty tight, plus having 6 turnouts and a lot of track hidden under a higher level is a potential problem for access. Also I don't see why having a short area of scenery without railway interest is a problem. There is plenty of "trains in the landscape" interest in #72.

Certainly avoid the US airlines if travelling to the states. Over the last 3 years every bad flight has been with other than BA. Can only speak as i find, but in 30+ transatlantic flights BA will be my first choice.

When I fly (regularly) to the states, BA is my favoured airline, Maybe longer, long haul are beyond them

For lined bands I just use lined transfers. For unlined, I have some sheets of 5 thou Nickel Silver. Bit of a pig to get soldered on straight, but the good old resistance soldering tool comes into its own with solder paint. Trick is to spot solder 1st.

You have in part answered the question of undergrowth. Since the demise of steam, there is virtually nil fire risk. In fact the undergrowth is now often seen as a view and noise blocker. Residents who do not want to see or hear trains now have to be consulted before NR are allowed to do any pruning or felling.

the only thing I would say is beware of over complicating matters. Your existing favoured plan is going to take a lot of building, which I imagine you will be doing single handed. I see so many grand designs that end up never finished and often scrapped because the builder has over stretched himself.

A trip that is definitely on my Bucket list. Was the steam monorail operating? The line, well rail, is clear in your 1st pic of the museum. I've always wanted to see that

I know nothing of this photo shopping malarkey, But could you not just go out with your camara and take suitable sky pictures capturing the sort of day you wish to recreate?

Thank you. I'd love to take up your kind offer, sometime. I too have a compspeed which you would be welcome to have should you require it (they fry coreless motors )

You may also want to consider adding trees at the RH end to add a visual break from the adjacent mainline station.

I wouldn't add much at all. I would suggest getting rid of the embankment at the siding on the RH and placing a small goods 'hut' rather than a full blown shed. Possibly a small cattle dock as well. Wouldn't want to overwhelm a small bucolic station.

I had the joy to spend a day with the late Peter Denny back when the layout was still in the vicarage. I'm probably wrong, but my recollections are of an old H&M powermaster. an ECM compspeed plus an ecm handheld controller. What Is uppermost in my mind was the incredible impression of reality. I'd love to see Buckingham again. Petty Denny was a legend and inspiration to so many. You need to be recognized for keeping this legendary layout alive.

You are correct in that the 'mainline' drivers operated from the ends. However, the Signalbox was at the front. This was a work of art, with a correct interlocked frame. the goods yard could be shunted from the front by the signalman or from the rear. IIRC there were buttons producing electronic 'whistle' sounds so the shunter could give instructions to the 'box. As I said a wonderful layout which certainly left an impression. Think it was around 1984 when i last saw it.

I too operated Thame once. What a wonderful layout. I sometimes wonder what became of it. Would be such a shame if it was dismantled.

The signalman doesn't necessarily select the controller either on DC. That is achieved by setting the route and the signals

How can the releases over 10-15 years and forthcoming releases be an assumption? You can't seriously class the Hornby Saint as a recent model which was back in the near toy days? seems you are choosingt to be argumentative for the sake of it

There used to be a superb S gauge model of Thame on the exhibition circuit. This was controlled by a proper interlocked lever frame at the front of the layout. The trains were driven, by 'drivers' who obeyed the signals, with provision for operation in the yard, away from the signalled main lines. All in DC.

This isn't an argument, though it seems certain people are making it into one. I have not made assumptions, nor do I like or agree with the trend towards prototype choice overall. But it is true, whether we like it or not. Sure, there will be releases of non preserved classes, but they will be in the minority of overall production. Economics, plain and simple. Take one prototype example. The GWR Saint, the most significant design of the 20th Century, from which every successful design (whatever the builder) was developed. Why no RTR release? I have been told on several occasions that there won't be one until the full size replica is finished and ready for digital imaging.

I agree, but if you total up the new releases, over say the last 15 years, then subtract those scanned from preserved examples, you'll find the percentage pretty small

I said with a few exceptions