Denbridge

Economically, I feel manufacturers will, in the main, avoid prototypes that do not have a preserved example available for 3D imaging. I do realise there have been exceptions (Garratt, coaching, stock, etc), but i'm sure this trend will continue.

I've been reading this thread with interest. Having seen the plan develop through its various forms I'd have to say I agree with 'Stationmaster'. If I were to build something like this the plan in #72 is the one I would adopt. All of the others, while having nice elements, have too many potential problems, be they operational, appearance, access, etc. The plan in 72 has all of the operational elements without unnecessary future hassles. I've found through hard experience that it is all too easy to over-design.

'Toy train' is how the Indians refer to the DHR

I wasn't knocking protocab, nor DCC, although cost is a factor, I find a well thought out analogue control system gives me fully prototypical operation. I'm happy to stay in the dark age

Interesting system. But one of the things that makes me refuse to switch to DCC is cost. Judging by the website it is nigh on £100 per loco plus the initial outlay for protocab. I'll pass on that.

I have only recently discovered your thread, being a Rmweb 'newbie' and find it most enjoyable and absorbing. I've read most of it from page one and Peterborough North, together with Little Bytham have given me cause to re-evaluate Finescale 00 modelling, particularly the trackwork. Thanks for sharing your wonderful photographs together with your descriptions and general thoughts. I for one, hope you'll continue.

I have a recollection of building a D2 for a dear friend, now sadly deceased. I.m pretty certain it was a nu-cast kit, but the grey matter isn't what it used to be.

This looks very much like a Hamblings model. I inherited one a few years ago along with several other models from that vintage. The family friend these belonged to commissioned a large number of models during the 1950's and 60's from Hamblings, Eames etc. Even have models reputedly built by George E Mellor, later GEM .

These Pictures perfectly illustrate the point I was trying to make. Beautiful.

00 will always stand out when viewed 'head on particularly with stock present, but when one looks at more usual views, the results are outstanding. I have returned to 00 from P4/EM for various reasons and am now regretting using Peco, having convinced myself it would be quicker, easier and cheaper ( I have huge stocks of Peco code 75 from an earlier HO German project). That said, with some work, the results aren't too bad

Hi, I have only recently come across your blog, being a 'newbie' to Rm Web. I am finding it both inspiring and hugely enjoyable, having read most of it from page 1, owing to a bout of severe ill health, confining me to barracks. Little Bytham is absolutely beautiful in every way. Having always enjoyed Stoke Summit on many occasions, seeing those trains on your current layout has been a joy. Little Bytham and Peterborough North have led me to re evaluate my views of 00 gauge. The trackwork and ballasting are simply amazing. I really thought both of these were EM. A real inspiration. Thank you.

You may also notice that my original comment has received more likes and agrees than most of your posts.

1. Threatening? where exactly? 2.how can coupling coaches so they perform in a uniform realistic manner and look convincing be a mistake? your method using Kadee couplings is in fact inferior. you still have daylight showing between your corridor connections. it matters not a jot what your so called professional qualifications are, they are hardly relevant to coupling MODEL coaches in a realistic manner, Tony and the many thousands of people who couple fixed rakes in the manner used, in varying formats have not made any errors whatsoever. 3. If you know anything of Mr wright, you would know he has built and been involved with several large, successful layouts, almost certainly better known than yours, however good they were. I personally am very impressed with Basingstoke, it is your habit of constantly attempting to belittle respected modellers to boost your own ego that i find offensive. 3. Pendon. Guy Williams was a very dear friend. What exactly were your contributions to Pendon? I'll look them up on the database I am compiling recording every individual who has been a modeller, guide, operator etc, since the 50's. I await to be impressed. 4. Interesting backtrack on your previous posts concerning GWR coaches. You were wrong, but aren't man enough to admit it. (So you have 10 Hornby coaches So what? I have 35 here being converted to EM, detailed and with kit built additions to form prototypical rakes. Once my current bout of ill health improves, these will form a thread on here. 5. I never said, nor implied, that Tony had copied Pendon. Your fixation of using Kadee's within fixed rakes is baffling. it looks inferior to the fixed bar method especially with the daylight between the connectors. 6.Yet again you choose to make insulting remarks. I don't need to invest in the books you mention. I have owned and used them for many years, together with many, many other books, publications, drawings and photographs. 7. If your idea of helping other modellers is to criticise, belittle, and insult, people as proficient, indeed more proficient than yourself, then you have a funny idea of 'helping' As an aside, I do remember the German and Japanese layouts, they were very nice, but hardly the pinnacle of modelling. Being the biggest isn't necessarily the best. When most of Basingstoke is equipped with mainly kitbuilt or highly detailed,modified proprietary loco's and stock, I will be very impressed. Lastly, having had 4 private messages stating you have always had a bad attitude, or words to that extent, i think i am far from alone in finding your attitude offensive.

Thank you. Thanks to Adam (below) I have one source. Should really continue making my own, but laziness is rapidly becoming my mistress the older I get

many thanks. I've always made my own, but getting lazier the older I get.

I've just come across your blog and am finding it very interesting. May I ask who makes the cast brass Carriage coupling units you've used?

Firstly, I am enjoying your thread, this will be an impressive layout. However, I think you need to take a careful look at how you post YOUR opinions. To state that Tony Wright has made classic mistakes and to infer he is less knowledgeable than you is complete twaddle. Mr Wright is one of the UKs most experienced modellers as well as being involved with several large successful exhibition layouts plus his superb Little Bytham. his coupling method works very well indeed and in fact is very similar to that used by Pendon Museum. I will also add that a lot of your so called knowledge is complete garbage, especially with Regard to GWR carriages. You state the GWR used offset corridor connections. Rubbish. You also state they didn't use bow ends on their carriages, again total twaddle. I will continue to enjoy your thread, though please, reign in the "holier than thou" attidude, especially when you aren't certain of the facts.