Tallpaul69

Hi Clive The layout is not yet built, hence the question! Cheers

I have only ever used DC control. For a new layout I am being told that the cost of chipping 200 locos, that I have to run 5 different eras on a model (say 50/50 steam /diesel and of those 50/50 are with/without sockets) is less than the cost of a control panel with mimic track diagrams for a 12ft x8ft 3 track round and round layout with 60+ points, 30 isolated sections, and 15 signals. Any advice welcome, also any thoughts on types of equipment, and traps for the unwary? Many Thanks Paul

These trains often split. For instance there were fish trains formed out of these from Oxford to both the south coast via Basingstoke and Slough via Reading, dropping wagons at stations along the way!

Having looked at all the published sources such I can find such as GWJ and many other magazines and books, offering both written and photographic information on the operation of the WR mainline around Maidenhead and the lower part of the High Wycombe branch, I am looking for any sources of observations of the area between 1955 and 1965 to plug the gaps in my information. I have a number of relevant WTTs and Coach and Parcel van Working Diagrams, but I particularly need to find out which locomotives from which shed powered a number of trains. I have asked on this forum and others if anyone has relevant Slough Locomotive diagrams which would help, but it seems they are pretty rare. So any offers of assistance will be gratefully received. Many thanks Paul

Having looked at all the published sources both written and photographic of the operation of the WR mainline around Maidenhead and the lower part of the High Wycombe branch, I am looking for any sources of observations of the area between 1955 and 1965. I have a number of relevant WTTs and Coach and Parcel van Working Diagrams, but I particularly need to find out which locomotives powered a number of trains. I have asked on this forum and others if anyone has relevant Slough Locomotive diagrams which would help, but it seems they are pretty rare. So any offers of assistance will be gratefully received. Many thanks Paul

It seems that apart from Stationmaster Mike, the above post stumped everyone, so here are two questions on a wider aspects of 1950s/60s freight at Maidenhead:- 1) Can any one tell me what freight apart from coal was regularly unloaded or loaded at Maidenhead?. 2) Can any one advise or provide pictures of the use of the open loading dock towards the junction from the Goods Shed, and when was it last used? Many thanks Paul

Re the operation of freight at Maidenhead:- Can anyone tell me in the 1950s/60s which of the four up and 4 down freights that stopped at Maidenhead on the Reading line delivered and or picked up coal wagons? Or did the coal come down the branch from Wycombe on the evening train that delivered coal and picked up empties from the Branch stations? Thanks Paul

Changing the subject a little:- Can anyone tell me in the 1950s/60s which of the four up and 4 down freights that stopped at Maidenhead on the Reading line delivered and or picked up coal wagons? Or did the coal come down the branch from Wycombe on the evening train that delivered coal and picked up empties from the Branch stations? Thanks Paul

Thanks Mike! I have yet to look in much detail at signalling, so in an attempt to not make my posts too complicated, I had just concentrated on the main thrust of the 1963 signalling scheme. To answer your point, I will probably only need to deal with the pre 1974 and post 1974 signals for two or three signals if I only portray the west end of the platforms. So it would not be too difficult to have removable lower quadrant and colour lights at those points. So I have made a note of this in my things to do list and once the track plan is finalised I will come back to this matter! Meanwhile, has anyone a signal diagram for Maidenhead in the pre or post 1963 schemes or post 1974? Things will have changed a bit when the signal boxes were concentrated to the one flat roof effort, modelling of which will be interesting! Many thanks Paul

True, My plan for the yard is to have a removable cover which converts it into a car park. Banbury, with its overbridge to mask the fiddle yard entrance and the engine shed to mask the other end, is on my reserve list, but is probably too big. The cover scheme above could be applied to the engine shed area if I kept the shed removeable, but it would need a modern building to do the masking function of the engine shed. Moreton in the Marsh is not very interesting in the later eras and Worcester is again too big and complex! Princes Risborough has appeal with its three branches, two in use to some degree until recently, the third to Aylesbury still in use. The preserved use of the Chinnor line also appeals. However the change to two way use of the up platform brings problems for the more modern version! I have looked at an awful lot of locations before settling on the Slough-Maidenhead area, but someone may have an approach that I have not thought of so keep the ideas rolling. However I have to say that the only West country location that appealed was Exeter, but is again too big. Bending reality to keep open a long closed line is not too appealing. One of the appeals of Maidenhead is the High Wycombe branch which is more than just a one engine in steam affair. Best regards Paul

Mike, Agree about the rationalisation, which is why I think it reasonable to take out some of the track, provided the essence of the operation of the location is preserved. By the way, another attraction of Maidenhead is that the Goods Shed remained, although not in railway use. I will be taking liberties with signaling, to accommodate my 1970s and 1990s versions, by working on basis that the 1963 scheme took place earlier. After all, nearer London it did! This is a compromise I can live with. So no lovely Lower Quadrant semaphores I am afraid! I do realise that the 1963 resignaling didn't last until 1990s but I am working on the basis that unless you are an expert in the subject, one colour light signal looks much like another (bet this stirs up a hornets nest of comments!!). Oh well back to my scale drawings! Cheers Paul

There seems to be some confusion:- I am discussing, and I thought you all were discussing, roundies, with trains either going round in one direction, or sometimes, to simulate going somewhere and coming back, reversing in the fiddle yard by putting a new locomotive (and brake van if goods) on the other end of the train. Of course the original loco has to come off (unless using current era trains and simulating modern both end motive power!). By reversing trains you do get twice as many trains passing a given point in the same direction before the cycle repeats. As I was also explaining you can change your goods train consists by dropping wagons off and picking new ones up in the goods yard. All these are ways to mask the small number of trains that can be accommodated in a fiddle yard unless you run very short trains which is only realistic for a few trains on a main line! Are we all on the same lines now?(excuse the pun!!) Best regards Paul i

Thanks for all the input guys however there are two things I definitely rule out:- 1) Vertical FYs:- Not convinced they would help! 2) Terminal stations:- I want to be able (when I choose) to sit and watch trains tail chase, also unless you are going to reverse every train somewhere, you need a reverse loop, which takes up a lot of space! So getting back to the main topic: Reversing trains in a through fiddle yard is reasonably easy provided you have sidings to hold locomotives (and for goods, brake vans),and crossovers to get trains from one direct to the other. The aim is to minimise the use of the hand in the sky even in the fiddle yards, except in the case of accidents! Agreed the formation might be wrong but for the goods there will be 4 times in a day in each direction, that a goods stops in Partly Maidenhead loops and drops off some wagons and picks up others. Thus the formations will periodically change. A benefit of Maidenhead is that for a large part of the day it had a pilot engine supplied by Slough Shed. This allows the dropped off wagons to be moved and the next pick up of wagons positioned ready. Mentioning the pilot, light engine workings were quite frequent with Slough shed providing a pilot for Taplow (which first went to Twyford, then after an hour or so back again. and engines for an early morning train from Maidenhead to Paddington, and half an hour or so later another one for the morning train from Bourne End to Paddington. This is just a taste of some of the interesting movements revealed by the WTTs and the Carriage working Diagrams. Best regards Paul

It wasn't just the high level,complicated woodwork,which someone else will build) and difficult access that was off putting! Yes, I know there are a number of other terminal GW stations, but they all have problems for me:- For instance I need to run in three time periods, 1960-2 1976-8 and 1990-2. So anywhere that closed or was drastically reduced in the late 60s-early 70s is no good! I have to use what stock and locos I have, and I don't think they suit Birkenhead or Swansea, also I think those two closed early?? I am not convinced by the terminus that quickly joins a through line- yes, I know Moor St did that! Anyway, thanks for the ideas, but I think my Partly Maidenhead has some mileage in it yet, so I will carry on with that for now! Best regards Paul

Thanks to You, Joseph and Phil for todays input:- I intend to have the layout professionally built so that the track laying and the baseboards are correct. Can't quite marry your and Phil's comments about 2ft curves although I agree they should be limited to fiddle yards or short lengths in sidings. Joseph, I understand what you are saying but the only possible termini are Paddington, Penzance or Weymouth, so the raised terminus idea wont fly for me! I will continue to refine Partly Maidenhead. In addition to the changes resulting from replies to my previous posts, I am also going to look at the following:- 1) Remove the station with just the ramps and a few feet visible on the right hand side of the layout. This will possibly allow a more correct goods yard, however the branch line may gain extra un prototypical curves. 2) Look at having fewer but longer fiddle yard tracks by moving some of the points on to the 8ft sides of the layout. This will reduce the requirement for curved points and may help cure the "reach" problem (together with accesses from under in the layout corners), but will reduce the flexibility of the fiddle yard with 3 longer or 4 shorter trains stored one behind the other on each track. I will have to look at the consequences of this for my timetable 3) As a consequence the scenic area will be limited to one 12 ft side, the branch curving round on one 8ft side and buildings masking the tracks on the other 8ft side. I can live with this compromise! If it works at that stage, then I can move on to a larger scale plan. What scale do you all think is best? Best regards Paul

OK-picking up on a few points in today's posts:- As the things I said at the beginning of Nearly Slough such as what I accepted in terms of such things as train lengths have been lost in along string of posts, I need to recap:- Main line Expresses:- 5 Coaches plus King, Castle or County (4-6-0 type) Long distance commuter trains:- 4 corridor coaches Local commuter trains:- 3/4 non corridor coaches plus 61xx, 57xx or 94xx or 3 car DMU Long distance/slow freight:- up to 15 wagons (less for lwb wagons) + Toad-28/38xx,Hall, 9F or WD 2-8-0 Local freight up to 10 wagons (less for lwb wagons) + Toad- 22xx, 56xx or 57xx Plus GWR Railcars, Auto coach +14xx My interest is in operation not building a layout so my layout will be professionally built and wired. Scenery I can probably manage although I may need to get particular buildings professionally built. I am busy fixing the points raised about Partly Maidenhead, and will Post a revised version in a few days. Along the way I had decided that 4 track main line would not fit, so I went for relief lines plus the loops off them, hence Partly Maidenhead,- Maidenhead without main line pair of tracks but with the elements that interest me.(Branch, Commuter trains, stopping freights, for a start). I might change the name to Somewhere in Berkshire, (Junction for Nowhere)!. If trains will not work at 5 coaches +loco on 3ft minimum radius, what radius is needed??? Why do all the magazines and books show so many plans that do not meet this criteria???? Unfortunately there is no club that I can easily get to and from as we no longer have a car, and bus services stop around 8pm! Not having a car does not free up a garage, there isn't one! I have a plan B, but will not progress that until I can decide if a worthwhile timetable can be run with part single line and 5 track fiddle yard plus 3 track branch fiddle yard. Cheers all Paul

Thanks everyone for your inputs:- I am glad there was some positives amongst the negatives, but clearly I was wrong to think that the people at Hornby Magazine's ideas might work! I would love to have some suggestions as to what you think is achievable in my space, which will have operational (not just shunting) interest, with a variety of passenger and freight workings, to a real timetable, but is, as David put it " Less ambitious". Not sure what he thinks would be suitable? Learning Software packages in my experience is not easy, and you cant draw either by hand or on a package until you have a plan to draw! , I might draw out Bourne End, but I don't think that will have sufficient operating interest unless I pretend the GW & GC is closed and send Castle hauled expresses through Bourne End! Cheers Paul

Thanks for the input:- Trying to respond to all the points:- 1) Nick:- the double junction went in late 1974, I intend to run a 1962 scenario, a 1979 scenario and a 1992 scenario, so this compromise is acceptable! Had I sufficient room, I would have the main lines in as loops connecting into the reliefs at the extremes of the visible section. I decided looking at the WTTs for 1960-61 that there was more benefit by having a goods yard behind the station (it wont fit between the relief line loop and the branch). The lack of fiddle yard loops means that some of the main line trains have to go so I think I can get a reasonable representation with just the relief lines. I can replicate most of the calling class 9 freights and the correct branch operations. As always I had to decide which compromises I could live with! Hence the "Partly Maidenhead" title. Please explain how I get locos on the rear of down trains without sidings for them? I do intend to redraw that corner to allow an access point! Oops! The crossover from down to up at that end got lost when I moved the bridges!. 2) David:- by the comment "the 4 into 2 platforms" as you put it I assume refers to the loops? However the loops at Maidenhead were not for running as 4 tracks but to allow fast trains to pass stopped trains! If you are referring to the lack of Main lines, see my comment in answer to Nick above. Reference the run round loop, there wasn't one beside the bay platform, running round could be done round the island platform. I have yet to work in a connection for this off scene. On the matter of height I intend to have the model high , at least 5ft, so ducking under will not be too problematic!. I am not a fan of the unrealistic low "helicopter" view that so many models are presented at. Looking down from on high view makes tight curves look worse! 3) Thanks Joseph, I had forgotten the HO curved points which especially off scene will not be out of place. I have queried the tight curves at the end of the fiddle yard with Hornby Magazine. Whether I get an answer remains to be seen! Best regards Paul

Hi All, This plan "Partly Maidenhead" still uses the 12ftx8ft space I have but aims to represent the Relief lines, Yard and Branch of Maidenhead. It is based on a 6ft x4ft n gauge plan in Hornby Magazine Yearbook No.3, which has the right configuration of station, down loop and branch to represent the relief lines, station and branch to High Wycombe of Maidenhead. This is blown up to represent 00. I very much like the sweeping curves of the mainline. I am not convinced by the left hand end of the fiddle yard and will redraw this area with similar curves to the right hand end of the fiddle yard. I have added an up loop, a siding off of this to represent the coal yard, and carried the bay platform round to eventually join the Branch fiddle yard. Then I carried this line round to join the up line at the right hand end of the fiddle yard, with a line off to join the coal yard siding and allow the removal of full coal wagons and replacement of them by empty ones! I have yet to finalise how this area is masked from view! The station still requires further work including the overall roof over part of the bay platform. By running all the trains in both directions (hence the loco sidings in the top left and right of the plan), a reasonable representation of the actual service is possible. I attach a plan of what is proposed drawn on the layout photocopied from the book. Constructive comments welcome. If you look back at my posts under "Nearly Slough" you will see some of my underlying thinking and acceptable/not acceptable compromises. In my next post I will explain the train service. Best regards Paul

Thanks for the input guys, the plastic tubes look good. I had wondered at the practicality of swinging a 5 ft cassette round. My main use would be to get trains on and off the layout rather than in a dead end situation, so that any train would not reappear in the opposite direction of travel soon after passing one way! (Hope you can understand this?)! Best regards Paul

I have a number of trains that I want to run occasionally on the layout I am planning. They do not warrant taking up one of the scarce fiddle yard through tracks just to run once in a running session, but manually handling the locos and stock on and off the layout seems too difficult, time consuming, and potentially dangerous to the detail on the items? I would welcome anyone's experience of cassettes and thoughts on construction. For instance, Is aluminium channel a good bet? Many thanks Paul

Hi Phil and Mike and everyone else watching this thread:- I don't know if this helps as I am without the 1938 WTTs:- In the Winter 1958 Section A Passenger WTT there is a loco that leaves Newbury LE at 6.00amMX (6.15MO) arriving Hungerford at 6.14amMX (6.30MO) to work the 7.20 am Hungerford to Paddington. An hour seems excessive to pull a set of coaches from the siding and prepare it for use even allowing for running round. So given the above timings, is this the shunter to help with the up and down freights? Similarly the 3.32pm passenger arrival returns at 4.25pm - more shunting? Contrast this with the 7.09 arrival which returns as ECS at 7.20pm! Hope the above helps Best regards Paul

I thought I would give an update on my planning of Nearly Maidenhead. It seems a good possibility as it is fairly easy and still allows a lot of operation to take out the up and down mains and just use the reliefs. Luckily the reliefs have a loop on both directions so slower trains can be overtaken by fast ones. The outside track will be the down line and the inside track the up. The track on the layout will be on a single level. The Iver pilot operation at Slough can be replaced by the Loudwater Goods. The High Wycombe branch will be a "short cut" from the scenic main line to the fiddle yard and will have its own small fiddle yard which will also connect round to the bay(branch) platform.. Currently debating which trains to use as the 12 each way I expect to fit in the fiddle yard. Some of these will be changed depending on which 8 hour period I am running. So for instance for 1962 during the 05.00 to 13.00 weekday period I tend to think these:- Down ( not in order of running but of importance):- 1) Blue Pullman 2) A named Express eg Bristolian 3) Chocolate & cream coached express. This will run round at approx. 2 scale hourly intervals 4) Maroon coached express. This will run round at approx. 2 scale hourly intervals 5) Down vac, vans 6) Down vac mixed. 7) Down Oxford /Didcot/ Newbury corridor steam 8) Down local (Steam) 9) Down local (DMU) 10) Class 9 long distance freight 11) Local freight 12) Down tankers All except 1) and 2) will make several circuits during the timetable I will need to fit in several tank locos coming out/ returning to Slough LE to be shunters or pick up/after dropping off trains and hope also to fit in a tired looking loco on its way to Swindon for repair or scrapping (the up version will be a different loco in gleaming condition after overhaul or a brand new diesel coming into service! Up:- As down but :- 1) Pullman cars steam or Diesel hauled. 12) I might replace the up tanks by an up milk train! All will need to be held three trains per track in the fiddle yard although the expresses will only be two per track. This means I need 5 tracks in each direction in the fiddle yard. I will update you further when I have drawn this out. Best regards Paul

Thanks to everyone for their input Trying to answer some of the points:- 1) N Gauge:-a)I have too much invested in 00 to make the swap! b) I find it too fiddly for my fingers and now I am 70 I have to think that this aspect will get worse not better! 2) 2 track against 4 track:- if its 4 track at all it has to be UDUD as there is little UUDD on the GW main line in the Reading -Slough area. Am currently looking at a two track version of Maidenhead modelling just the yard and branch junction. 3) minimal handling of stock and locos required so I do need more that 4 loops and longer that 1 train length each although I am cutting the length of all but the crack expresses and will run a day as 3 8 hour sessions probably in 1/2 time. So looking for 12 trains to be held mainly 10 wagons or max three coaches with just 4 trains of my original length. I will reply further on Sunday Best regards Paul

Thanks, but how do I find the Guide Dog Bridge thread? Thanks for other suggestions on layouts to look at, but despite several trawls of RMWeb I have yet to find anything better that my plan. Remember it is Near Slough, not attempting an exact copy. I was confused by the thread on "a nod to Brent" where there appeared to be no scale plan prior to the build? You all keep telling me I must draw the room to the last millimetre before I do anything, followed by exact scale of every piece of track otherwise I will have a disaster?? Crewlise is good, and going for a terminus solves some problems but just doesn't fit with the sort of timetables I am wanting to use. There are few GW terminuses that run off of main lines (Cheltenham St. James is one). Even ignoring this problem,the Cornish Riveria has to run into Paddington. Even I would not attempt to portray 15 platforms in 5! Also having looked again at Upton Hanbury I just don't think a 33ft layout can be cut down to 12ft!! I like Newbury, but even if I took the 1/2 a station approach there, it is too long. I would only have the west end with the bays, or the east end which would be too wide if a reasonable yard is included, and without the yard the local freights are a difficulty! So I will continue and will try a version of my Near Slough, (perhaps Nearly Slough?) where the relief lines meet the main lines off scene, the descent/ascent to lower level is at the rear and starts earlier, with some sidings for the local trains in front. Thus the only 4 track will be through the station. Then I will measure the incline lengths,calculate the slopes and see what is needed to change. It will be a while before you see this as I will be doing this to exact scale with 3ft minimum curves in the visible area, and 30ins elsewhere except in sidings that will not see bogie stock. (the room has already been measured accurately over a year ago!) Best regards Paul