DK123GWR

No, sorry.

My advice on this is not to think too big. The aforementioned three platform terminus has gone the same way as every other layout I've attempted to build on wood - baseboard, track, electrics, platforms, stalled... I've found progress much easier when working in the limited space offered by boxes. I was walking down the road one day when I noticed a TV box which had been left for the binmen. I have built a BLT to about 80% of scenery complete, destroyed it (there were a number of problems, and am currently working on Mk2. I am currently building a very simple Inglenook - two shoeboxes form the baseboard, with one strip of cardboard for the FY. I have used two set-track points cut down to fit the space more effectively (somebody, from memory @DCB, had suggested doing this to reduce the distance between track centres, but I used it to save length) and some second-hand flexitrack. I want to get it finished in the next month so I can take it to university, and because the space is so manageable I really think that I will. The great thing is that a layout it a box can be packed away easily - no mistreatment by family members. The concept favours shunting layouts, and @TechnicArrow has produced some excellent examples in shoeboxes, but there is no reason a first radius loop couldn't fit into a TV box - you may even fit an R2 loop into a larger one (the crazy 100" TV's advertised at the Euros would have boxes big enough for R4 plus, but as this is the size of my front window I can't imagine too many 'normal' people buy them). I would imagine a TV box or some shoeboxes could be acquired easily on Freecycle if you don't have them already, and I would highly reccomend looking at this option if you do want to start a layout.

I haven't a clue. I'm staying in Middlesborough at the moment and my Dad took us to Stockton, refusing to tell us what we were there to do. Often, this is just in order to be annoying but I think his question 'how could I possibly describe that?' was a fair one in this case.

Hi Tubs. I would like to second everything that Nelson says above. Education is of course far more important than modelling and it will almost certainly be your primary focus at the moment. That said, don't force yourself to work too hard. Everybody needs a break from time to time and you shouldn't beat yourself up for taking one (this applies to education, modelling, and virtually everything else in life). Remember too that the summer after exams is often long and relaxing - if you want to do some modelling then allow yourself to use that summer as a reward (it may be worth saving for it). As for whether to go to college or sixth form, don't worry if you haven't fully decided yet. You should be able to apply to both and then choose between them later in the year. It's amazing how quickly a picture can form of what you want to do, even if you previously thought you wanted to do something completely different. I went through school knowing that I would go to my school's sixth form and then to university - because I'm embarrasingly academic, the school's sixth form was very good, and it didn't make sense to move out of an environment where I was already settled (other people need a change though, and end up at different school's sixth forms). However, I was very uncertain about what I wanted to do at university. The main options were physics (I was the top student in my school at GCSE), or something to do with politics or economics (subjects I was interested in but wasn't able to study until sixth form). I don't think I actually made my choice until last summer (year 12 into year 13) when I applied for various courses in the field of economics (sometimes combined with politics). It felt like most people had decided broadly what they wanted to do before they even started sixth form. I can assure you that some of those who had changed their minds a long time after my plans were set. One person was adamant until Christmas (2020) that they wouldn't go to Oxford irrespective of whether their application was succesful, and will start their History course at Oxford in October. Another person was set on a particular uni course until a month or two before exams, and is now taking a gap year because they've changed their mind because they want to apply to a conservatoire. I hope you can see why I reccomend applying to college and sixth form if you are unsure - people who have been sure often change their minds, and you really don't want to end up doing something for two or more years if your heart isn't in it. Finally, on the subject of locos not working, I am very tempted to join the Jeremy Clarkson school of maintenance with respect to one particular Railroad A4 which has always run flawlessly - but has now developed an issue where it either won't move at all (pickups not making sufficient contact with wheels), or will cause a short every single time it passes over points. Several other locos have also given up, despite thorough cleaning of every moving part an electrical surface, and I'm left trying to operate a three platform terminus with a 50, a 56, a 66 and an 08 with a loose wheel - not really ideal.

Stockton-on-Tees. No further comment.

Don't be silly - the wind is caused by windmills and turbines acting as giant fans. The increasing frequency and severity of storms is nothing to do with climate change brought about by pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere for two centuries - it's all these new wind turbines being installed which are blowing the wind harder! The turbines don't actually generate power - they contain electric motors which spin the blades. I thought everyone knew this! Are we still on topic?

What you need is a sizeable freelance railway company formed in 1923, which has probably been influenced by Swindon design but, like the SR under Bulleid, would be willing to take a rather unconventional approach at times - and one driven to modernise traffic in a way which would have encouraged them to look beyond what was possible with a simple evolution of Churchward's 4-6-0s. Luckily, I'm trying to create the locomotive history of one of those. The West Country Railway would have adopted fully fitted freight trains by the time such a proposal came around. This would include a number of long-distance workings over other companies metals - particularly stone trains and traffic from the various ports on Lundy (which would use standardised shipping containers as soon as BR had the infrastructure in place to unload them). It would also continue to deal with heavy, long distance passenger trains of the sort the Kings were designed for during holiday seasons, even if it would move to more frequent, lighter trains from the mid 20th Century (possible opportunity for a modern Atlantic?). A fast, powerful locomotive with high tractive effort would certainly grab their attention for fast freight and heavy passenger use. The WCR would consider proposals from any private builders producing designs to meet this specification.

Now that these have been out a short time, does anybody have more feedback on them? I'm particularly interested to find out how much traction is reduced and how much less dirt they pick up.

It's easy to get this to the edge of its haulage capacity - no village hall required.

Alpha and Beta would probably be stopped by a normal locomotive body shell. Gamma is the main risk in this context. I've only studied physics as far as A Level, but in a fission reactor there should only be a few radioactive isotopes decaying. I would imagine that it is therefore possible to predict which frequencies of gamma radiation would be emitted in large quantities. If this could be done with sufficient accuracy, could it theoretically be possible to design a molecule whose structure allows it to absorb those specific frequencies without having to rely on large amounts of a very dense material? It would probably depend upon how great the range of frequencies emmitted is. Like Rodent I am perfectly happy to be corrected, but as far as I can see it would be theoretically possible to find an alternative to lead - although of course this is not the same as being practically possible, which I suspect it would not be.

Because it isn't quite the same without the 'chuff-chuff-chuff-chuff'? Using electricity to drive may be more efficient, but using it to boil water retains the character of the locomotive more effectively as far as I'm concerned.

A very effective source too - even in November it can get very sweaty inside the Commons chamber. If they could pump some air between Westminster Hall (usually quite chilly) and the chamber both spaces would be far more comfortable.

The boiler definitely needed to be shorter, but as I've managed to create a fairly rigid structure I'm not changing it. If all goes to plan this should gain pannier tanks, a small coal bunker, a smokebox door*, and paint by the time I go to uni. Chassis and footplate from a Neilson pug (Smokey Joe), cab from GWR 101 (2013 collector club loco), firebox and smokebox from the Dowlais Ironworks loco (Queen Mary), and boiler from the lid of a lip balm tube (this is a very unsuitable material, being far too brittle - I should have used it as a mould for plasticard). *The original was donated to a Hornby Thomas at a time when I didn't think I'd be using the boiler and smokebox again

DC's hopes died long before Topsy. Edison had already left the lighting industry by that point.

I don't know where the technology is at the moment but could electric power with a battery coach* work? You would have to have confidence that the batteries could last a whole day (or be able to recharge them at stations) and be able to shunt the coach to be at the loco end at each terminus. This could be done by a dedicated hydrogen or electric shunting locomotive, or by the locomotive using steam already in the boiler, possibly with a small battery in the (otherwise redundant) bunker to supplement this. For operation on electrified mainlines, substitute the battery coach for one that takes power from the wires or third rail (as appropriate). Power from a support coach would also allow greater water capacity for tender locos, since there would be no need to store fuel. *These could also be used for electric loco and EMU preservation.

Certainly no lynching from these parts. Tell me when you've built it and I'll be at its first exhibition!

Just to emphasise the point, here is a link to the STEAM virtual tour, showing the dummies in question. I agree that they are sometimes hard to hear and understand them - and at the age of 18 I sincerely hope my ears aren't to blame for that. I thought I'd edit this to add that I am dissapointed with the way STEAM has changed since I was a young child. The loss of the hall that used to contain models and nameplates to a conference venue was quite sad. I might have found it dull when I was very young, but nowadays I would like to wander around it. Not every artifact would be of interest, but I'm sure that quite a number would, and I certainly enjoyed the similar hall when I last went to York. I hope that in its new role as a conference centre it is at least able to provide revenue to support the rest of the museum. I also used to love the steam loco simulator - despite being too young to really get the most out of it. I can't remember the last time I saw it working, which is a great shame as I think that was an attraction which provided something for people of all ages (though I suppose it probably also had high maintenance costs). On the other hand, what does remain is still quite good. The signal box simulator is excellent as a way of engaging people and teaching them about semaphore signalling, something which most people below a certain age will harly ever have encountered. It branches off from just displaying rolling stock to show how the railways themselves worked, which is something I approve of. The model railway is also excellent from what I remember of it.

This rather atypical Sam's Trains video made me think of this thread. While it might encourage some people to go off and research the power classifications in more detail, Sam clearly doesn't understand it himself - and the video would have been dramatically improved if he'd spent ten minutes on Wikipedia during his research. At around 14:00 for instance, he wonders aloud why his streamlined (LMS era) Coronations had a lower power classification than his unstreamlined (BR era) ones. It would take less than two minutes on Wikipedia (or any number of other sources) to find out about the 1951 reclassification of 5XP locomotives to 6P, with the knock-on impact for higher classes. In other words, a while it is a positive contribution in terms of provoking thoughts, it's also a missed opportunity for education.

Find the loudest vaccuum cleaner you can and use it to create a model of Brunel's atmospheric railway. If people start making comments about poor running, politely remind them that Brunel's didn't work much better.

On a finescale ECML layout, use three of these in front of The Flying Scotsman 'because they're faster than my A4s'. Then show Flying Scotsman (the loco) hauling a dynamometer car. Display a dial reading 98mph. Enter City of Truro painted to blend in with the background, which catches up to the train and 'pushes' it, as the dial suddenly increases to 100mph.

You might also like to consider using wheels without traction tyres, such as those provided by Peter's Spares. Adhesion could be recovered through additional weight (force=coefficient of friction x normal reaction force - removing traction tyres reduces the coefficient of friction; the normal reaction force is the mass over the driven wheels x 9.81). This will come with the benefits of less dirt accumulating on wheels and track (traction tyres are a major source) and would allow you to fit additional pickups if necessary at a later date.

I thought HST Mk3s did not have buffers, which this coach does. Unless you are showing that the buckeye coupling is in use, but the whole area is too dark for me to see whether that is the case or not.