Tallpaul69

Fortunately (or not) depending on which way you look at it-No! There were actually two earthquakes Monday morning! Now this afternoon it is hammering down with rain. This is the end of the emergency weather forcast. Meanwhile back in my model land the dreaded Virus has got in the way of the building of my layout. Being rubbish at woodwork, track laying and electrics, I had subbed the building of my layout. However the guys down to do the job have decided that they cannot for the foreseeable future, start complex plans like mine for fear that they get ill and being towards the vulnerable end of the age spectrum, might not be able to compete it. They have suggested a simpler plan that can be built in stages and which would be useable after they complete the first stage. So I am in discussions with them to turn their suggestion into something that works for me! We have got to the stage of them drawing up my sketch based on their suggested layout, to see if it can fit the available space. -Fingers crossed!! I am doing research on a different part of the WR while I wait to see what they come up with. More anon..... Best regards Paul

Hi to Mister T and Unravelled, who I understand are both working on layouts based on Wheatley/Thame on the Oxford to Princes Risborough line? I may be joining you depending on my reaching an agreement with the Guys building my layout to adopt Thame as the basis of the first stage of my layout. I was working on a layout plan based on Maidenhead, which you can follow on my thread "Lower Thames Yard". However this has been scuppered by the Virus because the layout needed building as one project and the guys felt it too comlex for them to be confident of not falling ill during ther build and potentially not being able to complete it! I don't have the woodwork, track laying or electrics skills to build it myself, I am a timetabling and operations man! Any way, I will start a new thread called "Maybe Thame", if I go ahead and I will let you know via this thread. Cheers for now Paul

For an upcoming 00 gauge model, I am looking for information on the Oxford to Princes Risborough line, in particular Thame, in the period 1958-63. I have the R A Cooke section 27 plans, the Middleton Press book and the Richard Lingard Book, plus all the GWJs. I am also aware of, and awaiting the arrival of the C.R. Potts book.So what I am after is the more obscure magazine articles and personal memories? Any help will be much appreciated Many thanks Paul

Here is some real steam - be it ever so small! Yesterday I took this photo at the reopening weekend of the Leighton Buzzard Narrow Gauge Railway. Doll is running round her train in preparation for the 2.30 departure to Stonehenge. And before you ask Clive, No she isn't a cut and shut from a standard gauge Caledonian tank!! Cheers Paul

From Large to Little! Here is a photo I took yesterday at the Leighton Buzzard Narrow Gauge Railway reopening weekend. Doll is running round her train at the Pages Park Terminus ready for her 2.30 departure to Stonehenge! Cheers Paul

Just for a change, here is some real steam! The Leighton Buzzard Narrow Gauge Railway reopened this weekend. So here is my photo from yesterday afternoon of Doll running round her train at the Pages Park Terminal ready for the 2.30 departure to Stonehenge! Cheers Paul

Good Morning All, Unfortunately, the guys down to build the layout have concluded that they cannot see when in the future they can start again building complex layouts such as mine, which they do not want to commence unless they are certain that they can complete them. Most of them are of an age where the effect of the Virus would not be mild or short term. They have suggested that what is feasible is something that can be build in phases and would be operational to some extent after phase 1. My layout as currently planned can only be built in phases if built on site, and I just don't have the skills to do that! So they have suggested that one of their "standard" designs, which is self contained, could be expanded slightly to sit in one 12ft x 4ft side of my 12ft 8ft hobby room and is within their current capabilities. I am going along with this, but it does mean that Maidenhead can no longer be the basis of the layout. Sol the work that has gone into researching the Train Shed and the Goods Shed will not see light of day as a model, although it al helps with my GWR/WR knowledge, so is not wasted. Currently, I am working up a version of Thame on the Oxford to Princes Risborough line, and in my miniature world this would have survived as a useful diversion route! In its real life, this line saw a quite wide range of locos from 14xx up to Castles, as well as things like Black 5s. Also Thame had an overall roof, so the structural details of Maidenhead train shed walls will come in handy. While Thame was quite long , and on a single track, again in my world it has double track and is shorter by reason of the sidings are beside the station rather than along from it. I am possibly going to call the layout "Maybe Thame"! I have the key books on the line, and one contains the 1935 working timetable, so I will use this for the basis of slightly busier than reality 1960/2 workings. I did look at Princes Risborough with its still existing large Signal box, but like Maidenhead this would require too much length. So, once I have reached an agreement with the layout builders, I will start a new thread, and post here what it is called! Meanwhile, I will probably post a few more details on rolling stock etc. which will carry over to the new layout Thanks to everyone for their input and reactions to this thread. Best regards Paul

I cannot help you on the coal merchants, but I am interested in the trains used to deliver coal/take away empties to High Wycombe and through High Wycombe to wards Maidenhead and Slough via the branch. My period of interest is 1958-1963. I believe the operations were that coal trains arrived at Princes Risborough and High Wycombe from the midlands collieries via the GC. The coal was then moved on by the freight trains running from Oxford to Taplow or Slough, I am not clear if the same trains also cleared empty coal wagons south, that were then bought north by later trains form Slough/Taplow to Oxford. Alternatively, the coal/empties could have been moved by the Taplow to High Wycombe and return local freight train? Do you have any information on any of this? Thanks Best regards Paul

Sorry, -00 gauge!

Hi there, I was not aware that Hornby had produced a TTS fitted S15, or a separate TTS for the S15? Can you post a pic of the box for the loco if an original fit, or the decoder if supplied separately? If you confirm the S15, and you still have it I would be interested for my S15? Many thanks Paul

I must be missing something? I have read this three times and I still can't see how you use LMS coach parts for a Class 122 DTS? Seriously, I need one of them, so I'd love to know what you used? Many thanks Paul

Might this be termed a "cut and shut train"?? What has the GOG done to upset you, they can't help it 'cos they take a larger gauge view of things! Still, anyone up for a steam hauled HS125? Take care All, the Virus is coming after us (again!). Cheers Paul

Update:- I have got my money and return postage back, and also found another Mallard, which arrived today and is A OK!! Re Neal's comment about Spain, I don't think that is going to be on our agenda anytime soon Virus or no Virus. The 10 mile house move here 3 years ago, was enough to be going on with, thanks very much!! However, there are plans afoot to rejig the layout plan which will give more room for the yard and allow the goods shed to be in its correct position. So, watch this space. Take care All

What about him?

I wondered if you and Kevin got it, hence also my laughing icons to both of your replies! I agree, we need a bit of light relief even in the middle of a serious hobby! By the way, we had a second earthquake here late Sunday night - no damage! Regards Paul Oops!! Maybe its me that's in a spin then?

As an interim layout until my railway room layout can be built I am looking for a second hand layout around 6ft x 4ft. with two continuous runs and some sidings.All I need is track mounted on a baseboard and wired, but if it comes with scenery and/or buildings, that's ok. Would prefer DCC wiring but will consider anything that works! Location is Bedfordshire so would prefer south/south east/ east anglia so not too far to collect! Many thanks

Sorry -No! Try Chief Petty Officer! I did give you all a clue with the "Lark" reference- meaning Navy Lark in which Jon Pertwee was the CPO- and Leslie Phillips the Sub! Good job I didn't go for a Doctor (Who ) line, that would have got you all in a spin(ning Police Box)!! Sorry, I'll try to be serious in future? Regards Paul

Or could it be the CPO, who got thrown overboard when the ship hit Little Muddle Quay?? What a Lark, Eh??

Hi Neal, I agree that running several sound fitted steamers together is very good. Glad to see someone else not afraid to own up to non steam era running! By careful choice and placement of railway infrastructure and scenic items outside the railway I aim to run three eras:- 1960/2 1990/2 and 2014/6. I would have gone for 2018/20, or even 2020/2, to have 30 year intervals, but the overhead infrastructure post 2015 is too difficult to cope with! I do have to claim rule 1 as there will be sidings in my layout that were in reality removed in the 70s, but at least Maidenhead Goods Shed can be in place, when running the 1990/2 era. I just have to make it removable so it is gone for the 2014/16 running! Re your Class 52s, which model are they. I have a Dapol 52 and a Heljan one. When the latter is chipped I'll try to video a comparison between the two! I had better get back on thread before someone moans about outside era content!!, Keep up the good work on Henley Cheers Paul

I promised some pics of the kit built items that Malcolm has painted and weathered for me, so here they are:- A few points to bear in mind:- 1) The track they are standing on is some gash pieces that I use for taking photos , so the connections are not what I would have in running track. 2) These items have not been numbered, that is not one of Malcolm's skills, and I can live with that! 3) I apologise for the light source reflecting off some items. I thought the area too dark, not expecting the light behind the models to somehow reflect.

Before commencing my second attempt at drawings for my version of Maidenhead Goods Shed, I have been giving some thought to the Shed Offices. On the real goods shed the offices were on the London end of the shed. However my shed is not a through shed as such although the track will pass through the London end wall, to terminate against the back (Reading end) wall of the Station Buildings. As drawn on the track plan sketches (posted a couple of times in earlier posts!), the road side London end corner of the goods shed also meets the station building .back wall because the two buildings are at an angle to each other due to them being on a curve in the track not on straight track. I could move the whole goods shed in the Reading direction which would as well as allowing space for the goods shed offices, allow the track through the goods shed to run a more realistic distance outside the London end of the shed. The downside of this is that it would reduce the length of the track clear of the goods shed for stock waiting to enter the goods shed. Another alternative would be to reduce the length of the goods shed so that its Reading end remains where it is currently shown, but the London end moves westward to allow room for the offices. This might be the best solution but I need to take care that the proportions of the shed remain believable! This could be achieved either by reducing the length of the 12 bays in the shed or by reducing the number of bays from 12 to say somewhere between 10 and 8? Reducing the width of the bays means reducing the width of the windows and also of the two road loading bays. Reducing the number of bays affects the proportions of the shed and the position of the road loading bays. So, I think I will sketch out both ideas and see what they look like. It also occurs to me that there is a benefit from the London end of the Goods Shed moving away from the Station Buildings. Doing this will allow a view over the Goods Shed Offices of the outside wall of the Bay Platform Train Shed. A difficulty with this is that, ideally, to block the view of the curve of the track through the Train Shed, it should move towards the Station Buildings, but this brings it further onto the sharper part of the track curve, which may make it difficult to maintain the straight side to the Train Shed! More on all this to follow! Regards Paul

Guess the standardisation was in the overall look not necessarily in the actual sizes! If you think about it many GWR built stations are similar, but each is adapted to the constrains of the site and the needs of the service? I might just use the "Tetbury" sizings especially if I decide the shed needs to be a bit shorter than it really was. Cheers Paul

Nick, Nothing cut yet, so no problem. In fact, this may partly explain why my first drawing didn't look right! I hope to get going on drawings Mk2 this weekend. Your detail photos will be useful in other aspects of the shed, so thanks for doing those. Meanwhile, today I have been on a trip to Bedford to pick up some weathered stock from my mate Malcolm. Not quite as easy as it sounds because being without a car we are dependent on the buses, and need to catch two for each journey. So left home at 0840, got home at 13.40, but only had an hour and a quarter in Bedford. These items went over there just before lockdown, but with my wife shielding then Bedford having a spike, followed by Luton having a spike (some of the buses I need to use start there) , I judged it had to be now before we all get restricted again!! I'll unpack them tomorrow and post a few picks. Regards to Nick, and everyone else reading this thread, Take care all, Paul

Understand the tree small pieces now! I agree about using brick effect plasticard surfacing and for buttresses etc.. I am thinking of using thick cardboard or a plastic sheet for the basic structure, both of which I have a good supply of! Because Maidenhead is so long I was thinking of making it in three parts:- Two identical halves for the main shed plus a third one for the extension. Alternatively I could make the main shed in one piece with cross reinforcements either at each quarter way or at each third way along. I might pose a question in the structures forum to see what the experts think! I guess with your plywood on a shorter shed you will not need cross strengtheners? Cheers Paul

I think it's the goods shed? To me, the road access looks a bit tall and narrow, but I'm only going by the GWR Goods sheds I am familiar with! I guess the height is reduced by the awning? Not quite sure what the three pieces at the bottom of the photo are, but looks like the roof line is different to Maidenhead Tetbury etc.? Keep up the good work, looks like you are beating me on the goods shed front hands down - I have still to finish my drawings! Cheers Paul