Keith Addenbrooke

Hi Jeremy, I enjoyed the video as always - you invite comments on the choice of bridge, and I must admit I did rather like the bowstring truss bridge (if that’s the right term). I think it would look great as trains pass across / through it, although I’m n9t the one who’d have to build it! Guess the assembly could feel a bit like the frame you go on to demonstrate in the film, albeit more complicated (but you’ve shown us you can do it). Like the plan for 2025 - I remember you were very encouraging when I similarly tried setting an objective for a project I was looking at a while back now too. I think there’s quite a lot to get done though, so hope it works out OK, Keith.

Thanks Phil, agreed. One simple way to add a Goods Siding to the Passing Station in this plan might be to length the loop to 59" and add a siding with trap point like this: It does mean facilities are split across the station, but the logic is that inbound Goods are delivered by Down Trains (esp. coal), as opposed to outbound traffic being loaded at the Up Platform Dock for onward transport. The Level Crossing gives access to both sides of the line. Goods Yard facilities such as the Weighbridge and Yard Office are not modelled, being in the aisle. As with the other station, it means shunting / coupling takes place at the front of the layout where it’s easier to see (esp. if 3-link couplers are chosen as one of the details possible with a layout like this). Just a thought. As you suggest, Wiveliscombe is another option - adding a Goods Yard behind the main Station Building in the corner (I note the loading dock there was in the same place as in this plan - so it doesn’t need to be moved). The only issue would be the reach into the corner - but prototypically it’s spot on, as you say, Keith.

A Great Western Branchline in OO Childhood holidays in the West Country, helping my Dad on the Dart Valley Railway Assocation stall at Exhibitions and local group meetings, plus his monthly subscription copies of Railway Modeller when I was growing up in the 1970s and early 1980s, have all combined to leave me with an enduring affection for Great Western Railway Branchlines. Hence this plan. I previously explored the idea of a GW branchline layout in 4mm Scale / OO Gauge in a series of Layout & Track Design threads a few years ago (starting here). At that time there was room in our home office for a portable table top layout I could set up on rest days and holidays, and with the help of others on the Forum was able to come up with a design for a simple layout in 8' x 4' that fitted the bill. A more elegant solution with greater operational variety was also kindly prepared by @Harlequin as part of the conversation: it can be found here. Having explored various options for this challenge without success, I decided to have a look at translating the plan I drew back then for the space we've been given here. It's something I know I wouldn't lose interest in, and with new products coming from Accurascale (Pannier Tanks) and Rapido (Small Prairies, Coaches and Toad Brake Vans), the quality of new r-t-r stock in 4mm / OO makes revisiting this popular genre an inviting prospect. Step 1: The translation - this is my plan from back then as it looks placed into the garage: The layout is designed to run point-to-point, with the Upper Station signalled as a Passing Station to provide two Staging Tracks. The Lower Station doubles as a Terminus (hence the Engine Shed), but is not a passing station - the loop is for running round only. The unlabelled siding (left side) is for the branch coaches. Ruling Train Length is 40" (3 coaches plus a locomotive), although clearance is very tight at the ends of the loop at the Upper Station. I therefore wanted to use the additional space of the garage to lengthen the loops, as well as to move from a table top to an around the walls design with straighter sidings (easier for coupling up). It wasn't as easy as I first thought - other than at the top left, there is no wall greater than 8' long. On the one hand this reminded me that 8' x 4' is still a lot of layout to build, and on the other hand it shows that a single garage isn't as big as it might seem when surveyed empty! But I have come up with something I like: I've kept to the original track plan, as I really like the simplicity and sense of spaciousness it offers. However, the layout only needs two trains on scene at any one time, rather than the four I've previously recommended. This introduces the big dodge I've used, as the 4' Lift Out Section across the doorway doubles as a series of train length cassettes (which are stored - ready to use - under the scenic section conveniently just to the left). There is therefore no fiddle yard - visitors entering the room see a fully sceniced slice of the West Country. Looking to the left as they enter, they see a gently curving line, so I'd recommend switching to Code 75 or Bullhead Track, as I've found the width of Peco Code 100 railheads when viewed end on hard to ignore. Minimum radius is 24" for the two corners at the top of the plan, and 36" for the open curves at the bottom of the plan. Easements are provided for. Benchwork assumes 6 x 6' long modules using L-Girder Benchwork. It is not a portable layout, so I have not worried about curved track and points across joints, but the 6' ruling length makes it easier to carry the wood needed into the garage for assembly. Standard width for the baseboards is 18". While this is not a Shelf Layout as such, I've taken note of Iain Rice's advice in his Model Railroader book on US shelf layout Design on appropriate width - balancing room for scenery with a width that helps with the illusion of a long, thin line. Curved backscenes, as suggested by @Harlequin earlier are used in all four corners, with the Workbench screened from view from the principal operating position by the Goods Yard. In practice, a more common arrangement for through stations might be to have Goods facilities on the same side of the running line as the Station Buildings and Signal Cabin, but I decided to keep the spread out look of my original as it keeps coupling / uncoupling operations closer to the front of the baseboard. The absence of any Goods Facilities at the Passing Station other than a Loading Dock also stands out - there would be a coal siding at the very least. One could easily be added of course. Water towers will be needed but aren't shown. The plan is simple, and a single box of 25 yds. of Flextrack is more than enough for the whole scheme (the track plan uses 19 yds, with spare for three or four more cassettes). Instead the focus can be on details: lineside fences and telegraph poles, point rodding etc. A road bridge (for a bus) could be added to break up the curve top right, which could run in a cutting. This is the sort of project where one could keep adding details and improving things for a long time, but where initial outlay on trains, track and control systems need not be costly. Relax and have fun (note the compulsory cup holder beside the main control panel). PS: with suitable buffer stops, note the lift out could sometimes be left out and the line run true point-to-point. Step 2: Would I build it? You kidding? When can I get started? A final thought Just one question - while this project suits me perfectly, would I go to all the trouble, time and cost of sealing up and insulating a garage first of all if I was planning a Scheme like this? Despite the limitations I've described previously, more layout could be fitted into the space. So, where else did I go on holiday as a kid? North Wales. But perhaps that's a story for another time... Thank you for reading my ramblings, Keith.

TT:120 signals are now available as another option I guess - just a thought (word of warning is I haven't tried them, but the ones I'm seeing advertised look suitably generic to be worth considering if needed), Keith.

Hi @RobinofLoxley, a very nice plan - I think there’s a lot to like in your design. It seems to me to make good use of the space both operationally and visually, and without the doorway access compromising the scheme. Should also be within the bounds of what is achievable for a single owner / operator with a good sized collection of OO stock to run*, and could well appeal to the kind of modeller who might want a garage conversion for a layout. Drawing on what @Pacific231G has taught us about Gare de Bastille looks to have been a smart move. Keith. (* Before I sold it off, my OO collection amounted to 20 locos, 40 coaches and 42 wagons - so I even I could have used this plan)

I’m afraid many of us passed that particular warning sign a long, long time ago (the modellers’ SPAD ?), Keith.

Indeed - a garage circuit for running clockwork (or any Coarse or 3-rail O-scale trains) could be something rather special, and would have a “Wow!” factor with a difference. Plenty of wall space for collector’s cabinets to be mounted above a layout too, Keith.

If anything, the backscene with the cooling towers seems to me to work even better for the blue period. Really good, Keith.

I've been thinking about taking the modular concept I tried in my previous post in a different direction: it may still be a good idea to have a scheme that can be constructed in sections, even if they are then fixed together when in place. If I look at 'flat top' boards using traditional plywood construction, then panels are still often sold in multiples of 4' x 2' sizes. 9 of these plus a bridge section would give me a circuit: That's quite a lot to make. If I increase my module size to 6' x 2' and use an open top or L-girder framework, then only needing 6 (plus a bridge) seems far less daunting: for comparison I've again drawn them as blocks. This is not a shelf layout - the deeper sections give more opportunity for scenic development around the tracks, but note the 34" reach into the corners: too far. As 6' planks / sections can be carried through the standard doorway, I'm thinking I'll base my next scheme around that length in order to meet the "easy to build" requirement. But I won't use a rigid 2' width. __________________________________________________________________ I thought an interesting counter-point to my rather drab initial idea for a progressive Branch Line Terminus to Fiddle Yard scheme would be to scope out the feasibility of a four track circuit for watching the trains go by. This is again in OO, for comparison, and uses Peco Long Radius Bullhead Rail points and crossings. It is not a finished scheme, I just wanted to show the new limitations I encountered: I've assumed the outer pair of tracks are an Up and Down pair of Fast Lines, with the inner circuits similarly a pair of Up and Down Lines for Slow traffic (freight and commuter services). I gave myself a minimum 2' radius for the corners, so hopefully sideswipe won't be a problem with a 2" track spacing (I don't have the stock to check). Visitors entering the room would see a gently curved section of track in front of them, viewing from the inside where the gap between coaches naturally closes. Angling the edges of the swing / lift our section to 10 deg. means rails can still cross perpendicular to the cut, being on the straight centre portion of each S-curve. Keeping to larger radius curves restricts platform length on the straight to around 7', long enough for a six coach (plus loco) train, but not a full express. Finding room for staging / layover sidings, any facilities (a goods yard, TMD or Loco Depot, coach sidings or parcels bays) will also be a challenge without further compromises. Even in my rough sketch there are facing points on the mainlines where the through line is on the diverging route, something I expect the prototype to avoid. One way to progress this type of idea would be as a folded figure 8, with tracks leading up from / down to hidden sidings beneath the station area. Personally I think I'd switch to TT:120, for which suitable Hornby rolling stock is now available (HSTs, Class 50s with Mk 2 coaches, Class 66 with container wagons, or Steam era East Coast A3 / A4 hauled expresses). End curves could be a bit tighter in the smaller scale. As it is, I think it would be fun to spend an afternoon watching trains go by on a layout like this, but there'd be quite a lot of work to develop an operationally satisfying scheme suitable for a "last great project" type layout, but maybe it's of interest to someone reading? Hope everyone is keeping safe and well in the wintry weather, Keith.

Hi @Neil90, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a written suggestion for the tuning fork to be used as a shunting puzzle game in the way an Inglenook or Timesaver can be. Sounds to me like your suggestion is as good as any - as you say, it worked! I do like the tuning fork concept for its simplicity and scenic opportunities more than operational challenge. A lot may depend on whether the model depicts two sidings (a small yard), or a running line with a single siding of course. Keep having fun, Keith.

As others have already commented, thank you @Mikkel for sharing your findings - a fascinating piece on social history as much as anything. A couple of stand-outs for me: the XMAS poster dating from 1905 - just for anyone who thinking the term ‘XMAS’ is modern shorthand! And the Cornwall / Italy comparison poster from 1908 (or earlier): a touch of ‘variety hall humour’ is not what I’d have expected on an Edwardian era GWR poster. We live and learn, Keith.

I had a good chat with the team from Malcs Models at the Warners / BRM NEC exhibition in November and was similarly impressed - although I was buying something in H0 on that occasion, I was very happy with what I got and with the level of personable service from the team at the end of what had been a (very) long day for them all. They came across very well, a credit to the hobby, Keith.

Greetings to all for the start of 2025! I hope everyone is safe and well. We're in the midst of building work to adapt our new abode and make it more accessible. I'm not sure how much modelling will take place in the coming months, as there'll be a whole pile of sorting out to do when it is completed. Much as I'd like to prioritise a layout project, that's not the most realistic goal for me to set at the moment. Nevertheless, several things recently have convinced me there is value in setting some practical and realistic forward looking objectives to help me get the most from our hobby, and that's the subject of this blog post. A video by Jason Jensen I was watching the other day includes an interesting reflection on the topic of setting objectives, starting at the 10:00min mark: (If you're not familiar with Boomer Diorama and his work, I would very much encourage you to check it out, here.) Not convinced? This one was 'on the button' for me - if you have any sort of "stash" of kits, you may be able to guess which direction this goes in. So where am I at? I'm nearly done finishing a couple of magazine freebie Metcalfe Kits I've been given, but what's next? 1. Finishing the kits I've started: These four are in various states of completion. The two H0 kits at the rear were intentionally left unfinished when we moved house last Summer to avoid damage to any details in transit - so I really ought to finish them now. The other two were paused and put away over the Christmas break, although I suppose the Polsue barn could have been used as a stable for a nativity, while the Noch Edelweiss Inn could have displayed the traditional "No room" sign too I guess? The trick when completing kits is not to use it just as an excuse to buy some more - that'll be the challenge if I finish these! 2. Solving the Neustadt Riddle: A lightbulb moment while watching a video by @James Hilton gave me a way to use my large Faller Neustadt Station Kit, discussed in my previous blog entry here and now ready for the project list: (The unlit compartment hides the motor unit, as there is limited space underfloor) I have some wood cut to 53" and 19" from baseboards I'd started in our last home, just right for a diorama here. While operation may be limited, atmosphere can be maximised, as James demonstrates in this short video: Building the Neustadt kit may move into 2026, but the 641 Coradia unit certainly meets the requirement for getting started, as well as my interest in having a model of a contemporary Continental prototype despite my lack of space. 3. More German modelling: Almost a decade ago now I started getting a bit more active in the hobby, making some of the static budget Dapol ex-Airfix / Kitmaster models from our local model shop for a mantelpiece display. They're long gone now, but it perhaps explains why I've been drawn to the Revell range of German steam locomotive kits. This was my Christmas present: 4. Narrow Gauge: This Peco Laser cut OO kit caught my eye: It was initially released as part of Peco's TT:120 product range launch, and is now available in OO (with the addition of an interior). Having described the TT offering as "perfect" this was one I couldn't resist. Without a raised platform, I think it could work really well for freelance Narrow Gauge. 5. New developments for Pagosa Junction: Last year I tried both Laser Cut and more traditional wooden Craftsman kits, and found the Laser Cut kits more to my liking. Neverthless, the quality of Craftsman kits continues to attract. This kind of quality can now be achieved with 3-D printing, and a company called "Keep it Rusty" had a stand at the Warners / BRM NEC show in November showing kits inspired by exactly the kind of high-end US modelling that always grabs my attention. This small boiler house will fit well next to the Depot - another diorama beckons! (see here as well): Plenty to go at then! I don't anticipate posting so much this year - I aim to use my time working through my stash instead! Although I am having a go at the Layout & Track Design Festive Challenge 2024-25 to keep the old grey cells ticking over. So that's where I'm at. As always, I make no claims to be an expert, or even a good, modeller, but I do enjoy our hobby, and I hope to be able to look back in twelve months and see what I got done. And, if I need a final prompt to get going... Have fun, and thank you for having a read of this year's ramblings. As always, let's see where we get to Keith.

Chris Tavare?

Not seen the spirit level on a roof trick before - but now you show it, seems rather an obvious thing to check! Look forwards to more in 2025, Keith.