AHW

3 hours ago, great northern said:

A Class H originating at Letchworth brings another WD along the Down slow.

 61204 ten stes oof towards Leicester, and is seen from an angle that allows the Claud to be in shot yet again.

If you're phito shoopping your captions - your crapping is a little enthusiastic.......

On 27/12/2023 at 11:27, Deeps said:

This is exactly the type of vessel I desire, thank you. The process of producing the vessel from a download is new to me but I will give it a go.

 

Also, thanks to Keith Macdonald for providing the link. There are a number of additional prints available that will be useful.

https://railsofsheffield.com/products/starter-set-rnli-shannon-class-lifeboat

On 17/01/2024 at 20:21, great northern said:

Oh dear.Oh dear, oh dear......Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.........Oh dear.......... Does anyone remember the hilarious Tony Hancock sketch where all he did was sit and look as lugubrious as only he could, and repeat those words over and over again? Well worth googling it if you haven't seen it. And why am I mentioning it? Because I had a serious oh dear interval earlier, when I started thinking that not only is there little to add to the layout now, but also that I've run the sequence so often that I know exactly what's coming. Before I knew it, I was thinking about a GE mainline junction station, with all the lovely associated locos that would go with it. This way madness lies. I must be stopped.

I guess it depends on what motivates you in the hobby - running sequence or photos or building stuff. In your shoes I would consider altering the curves at each end - to allow the fiddle yard to be underneath a new scenic section - stock either descends into the fiddle lines at the end of its run - or ascends to run through a new scene. This new scene might be narrower than your station  - just enough for four lines (no points) - perhaps the Nene Bridges - and the viaduct south of those - use the advice of Iain Rice and don't build what you can't see - you'd have the new scene at the front of the fiddle yard so you'd reach over it to access the tracks - but sit down and you'd just see the trains running across the bridges. A white background and you'd reduce the amount of photoshopping needed.....

Reading some of the responses re layout items - you may be interested in this supplier. https://www.dapr3d.com/

Currently on the Christmas break and has turned off their product pages to save confusion I guess.

But if you dig around you can find these - I'm hoping to add the crane to my dockside once it takes shape...

You may be interested in this item which I found in a house clearance shop some years ago. There are several copies for sale on the web - London's Lost Riverscape - rather like a streetmap from the river taken in 1937. A very good source for the late Iain Rice's LDEs (layout design elements) if you wanted to model a river frontage/dockside although sourcing a ship model for 00 gauge seems to be hard work.

What makes the book most interesting is that the authors have traced the working lives of the ships seen moored at the riverside - many of them lost to enemy action in the coming war.

It's a daily pleasure to log in and view the updates on this thread. As a young man I was obsessed with GWR branch lines desirous of that chocolate box countryside to obliterate the bleakness of my surroundings (I lived in South East Essex at the time). In my later years I am so glad that I 'found' the ECML which is now my 'hobby' of choice. Watching the running orders unfold on this layout never gets old.

Luckily I am travelling to Yorkshire by train tomorrow so will get a few hours of the real thing.....

On 10/09/2023 at 15:55, Captain Kernow said:

At Ham Lane level crossing on the Somerset Levels, the breeze appears to be getting up:

 

Someone tell that old lady her dog's in the back garden.......

Guys - I'm really appreciative of the suggested edits to the track plan. Suffice it to say it will remain as it is. (Here's the back story) These docks, on a tidal river in the fens were at one point very busy - today (in 1957) they are run down and have limited timber trade and some minor aggregate/mineral traffic. BR Eastern Region never downgraded the docks,  or the junction which now is used for lay byes as the mainline in this area is down to two lines.

Those of you looking at this with signalling expertise and querying, or thinking about the swing bridge - it has its own control cabin on top of the main turning span. I'm not sure if this cabin would control the signals protecting the bridge or if a dedicated box would be required. I'm hoping to avoid having two boxes and am considering a single box mounted over the lay by loops. My thinking is that land between the two loops of the river was tight and placing the box over the track negated that issue - also it gives the box height and visibility across both bridges - swing and fixed.

Further comments welcome. I'm still absorbing the most helpful signal plans put forward.

I noticed this earlier and sent an email to BRM - in my opinion this was evidence that the forum site itself had been hacked by scammers hoping the vulnerable and confused would start clicking for prizes and hand over bank details when requested.

Obvs the scammers had no idea how sharp, switched on, and technically cute Railway Modellers actually are......really wasted their electronic breath on this community.

Morning all. Sometimes there's nothing worse than a forum entry that starts, makes demands of the community,  and then just goes dark.

I'd just like to apologise for the radio silence on this topic.

Many of you have viewed it and I have some very helpful contributions back in response to my lack of knowledge. I've been very busy elsewhere, but intend to return to this thread as soon as time allows and conclude it with the chosen solution. Thank you all for your patience.

1 hour ago, 5BarVT said:

Here’s a first attempt. I’ve assumed that the dock lines have no signalling beyond the junction.  Trains enter on one line and depart on the other, although there is a need to use both in the wrong direction when running round to depart.  There will be notice boards down at the dock sidings to instruct drivers where to stop etc. Distant signals are not shown as they are off the scenic area.

I’m not sure if the signals marked ‘?’ become a requirement with two boxes.  If there were no swing bridge and only one box in the V of the junction I would remove them.

Paul.

Paul - that's really helpful - thank you so much. I'll digest this and then in all likelihood come back to you with some questions if that's ok.

1 hour ago, 5BarVT said:

Big question: are you looking for a colourlight or semaphore solution?  Both would be possible for an East Coast 1957 layout.

Paul.

P.S. Swing bridge won’t make any difference to the signals required.  Might make a slight difference to position but probably not even that.

Semaphore is the preferred option. Thank You

Control panel images

Hi All,

I'm going to repost this one here in the hope it reaches a wider audience - hoping someone is ready with some knowledge that I don't have.

Previously I asked for advice regarding point work for a DCC layout. You were very helpful. I now  have need of signal experts.

I have a track plan - I have NO idea where to put signals. I could spend hours (days) trying to find out - or I could ask people who've already done it got the t-shirt etc.

My layout plan is basically a length of East Coast Mainline with two junctions (see images) allowing access to a small dockyard trapped on the bend of a river.

Points and crossovers take traffic off or on the mainline into or from two loops. Inside the loops points and three double slips allow 'shunting puzzle' access to two sidings which are on the dockside.

(I was asked for extra info which is;

1. Layout is based in the Fens - just north of Peterborough

2. The double track is the ECML - BR - May 1957 - so passengers and freight - (NB based on ECML - not a prototype location)

3. Line is ex GNR/LNER

4. This layout will be a groundhog day experience - 12th May 1957 is the time setting. (Allows me early and late crests - blood and custard and all crimson/maroon)

Finally in this scenario the mainline speed is restricted because of a swing bridge - so my Pacifics will be able to rumble slowly through before picking up once off stage.

Traffic in the loops will be either freights waiting for a path, or dropping off - picking up from the quay)

I'm assuming that the loops and sidings can be controlled with ground signals? However the two junctions should need bracket signals.

To complicate matters the mainline also crosses a swing bridge which presumably needs signal protection for the down mainline. (We can assume the up line is covered by a signal off stage?)

To assist in understanding the above I enclose three images - a badly drawn 'sketch' of the overall layout, which will occupy four scenic boards, and a diagram view of the likely control panel - this is two images - note the panel joins together on the line A to B.

If anyone is interested in making helpful comments I would very much appreciate it.

Finally just to set the scene as it were - this is not a model of a prototype location - my interest is in making a good looking stage for running trains - but I don't want glaring errors in 'prototypical' operation to cloud the eventual product. On that point if anyone thinks the track plan is 'wrong' by all means say so - but I might not necessarily alter it (Yes I know some catch points are needed to protect the main line - removed for clarity)

Many thanks - apologies for a long post. (I'll have to upload the images in separate posts below this one)

Afternoon all.

Having actually now made a layout plan I am about to begin building. I have based my track plan on Peco code 75 track. I currently have plans for 16 items such as points, double slips etc.

My leading question is whether to select Insulfrog - or Live Frog?

I'm sure you guys have opinions - I would be very glad to hear them.

For context the layout requires slow running, lengths of main line, loops and sidings including some on slight gradients.

Look forward to reading your responses. Many Thanks in advance.

Wondering who else on here was using the website http://www.brdatabase.info/

Valuable searchable database of sheds, locos etc. I've used it extensively to research the ECML.

Went to bring it up this pm for a question on the BR 2MT and it's no longer there.

Anybody know about this.... or have any info.

Many Thanks

Two images - what Google used to show us - and what you get now...

1 hour ago, great northern said:

While looking for something else entirely, I found the licence to publish images I received from Peterborough library. My tiny mind had forgotten this, and indeed was convinced that I could not put them on here. However, I can, which is good, as I need to seek your opinion on an important subject. So here is the one and only good image I have ever found showing at least part of Station road, with this caveat." Original photographs form part of the Kitchin collection held by Peterborough Archives Services. They are not to be copied without the permission of the copyright holder".

My question is about the tree on the right hand side of the image, which looks a bit strange. I have asked 4D model shop to make a bespoke model of it, and they are as puzzled as I am, and indeed asked me if there are two different trees and if it is the lower one I'm asking for. I have only one other image which helps at all, and that is the aerial photo Steve @31A found for me. That shows that this is the only tree at this end of Station Road, and I can see nothing in the background that could have got sort of superimposed over the top of it.

 

So, can you arboreal experts, or anyone else for that matter, make any suggestions about this?  What sort of tree is it?  Could it really be only one tree? The trunk seems rather narrow for something of this height, if it is one complete tree. The only other large trees around are right down on Station Approach, near the hotel, and the angle from which this image was taken does not seem to me to allow for one of those to be in shot.

So I would suggest that the reason for the tree's appearance is quite simple. The tree is close to the house. The lower half of the tree, more easily accessible from a standard gutter height ladder,  has been regularly pruned/trimmed and the top half has not.

The way you can tell is as follows. The lower leaves are quite dense but you can still pick out some individual branches which are short. The upper half of the tree shows lengthy branches in a more natural form - they have not been trimmed. If you consider the historical period being viewed here it makes sense. Someone who lived in the house wanted the tree kept under control, especially with a view to maintaining daylight. They were able to get at the lower branches more easily, possibly on a DIY basis. They cut them back hard, probably bi annually, and this encouraged lots of new growth, hence the dense leaf pattern. However they could either, not get easily at the top of the tree, or didn't think it through, or simply weren't bothered as the upper branches didn't obscure the windows.

The other thing to think about here is that whilst many ordinary working people of this period took great pride in their homes and gardening was a very popular pastime, they didn't actually spend time 'outside' in the way that we do today. They went outside for tasks such as weeding, mowing the lawn etc but went back inside for tea. I know this for a fact as my great uncle, once an 'inservice' head gardener and occasional footman at a country house in Norfolk, visited me in his 80's. He loved to be in the garden, but only when 'on task'. When I persuaded him to stop weeding for a cup of tea, he insisted on sitting inside the house for it (as did his wife). Therefore this tree needs to a) look neat and tidy and b) not obscure the windows too much but c) doesn't need to look natural in the way we might insist on today.

Obviously there are many historical images of people sitting outside taking tea etc, but if you dig into them you'll realise they were the people of leisure, not the poor sods who did all the work.

On 08/09/2022 at 09:06, great northern said:

Got up early, drew curtains, heron flew off. It hasn't come back, so will have had its fill for the time being.

 

No easy pickings for them at PN, as I shall make sure there are no ponds in the gardens of Station Road. 60514 carries on its way, and the regulator will have been opened.

 

 

Another of our favourites has arrived at Platform 6 with the shuttle.

 

 

 

 

 

You need a plastic heron - herons are very territorial and aggressive - a plastic heron convinces the real one that the pond is 'taken'. Works for several of my neighbours who have very expensive fish ponds. 

Well a strip down of the offending engine did not uncover much. There wasn't much of the white grease in the lead driving wheel plunger but some around the gear box. I've cleaned out and oiled as per directions. However this hasn't made much difference. I'm not that impressed with the mechanism to be honest and I'm planning to investigate other ways of improvement - I may look into swapping out the complete drive train. Thanks for the helpful comments - much appreciated.

21 hours ago, 31A said:

A thing to check with the Bachmann A1 (as with a lot of Bachmann engines of this generation) is the operation of the sprung driving wheel axle; in this case it is the leading axle. Whilst a very good idea in terms of improving current collection and I wish their newer locos also had them, they can become jammed when the factory - applied 'white grease' solidifies after a number of years.  The A1 as a model has been around for quite a while now, so if any of these are from early batches that could well be the case.

 

If the sprung axle plunger can't move up and down freely it can cause intermittent wheel / rail electrical contact, and could also be the cause of the jerky and wobbly running.

 

You need to release the 'keeper plate' plastic moulding off the bottom of the loco mechanism by removing the screws you can see along the bottom of the loco.  The keeper plate will then lift off bringing the front bogie with it, but remains attached by the pick up wires at the cab end.  You don't need to detach these.  Then lift the driving wheels out and you'll see the sprung plunger above the leading axle.  If necessary clean all the white grease from this, re-lubricate it with suitable thin oil, and re-assemble.  Be careful not to lose the spring from the plunger!

 

If your models have the Service Sheet with them you should be able to see on this which screws need to be removed.

 

https://www.lendonsmodelshop.co.uk/pdf/Bachmann OO Service Sheets/Class A1.pdf

 

While you're at it (and depending how much you want to dismantle) you could strip the rest of the white grease from around the gears etc., and re-lubricate them as well with oil, together with the axle bearings and coupling rods, etc.  Also when re-attaching the keeper plate, make sure all the pick up wipers are pressing against the backs of the wheel tyres at all times, when the wheels move from side to side.  If not, it is easier to put a slight bend into them to increase the pressure before you re-attach the keeper plate.

 

With mine, I found the 'fall plate' (rearward extension of the cab floor to the tender) was resting on the front of the tender, causing the rear driving wheels to be lifted from the rails at slight undulations of the track.  This piece is metal, and it's quite easy to put a slight upward bend into it so that it is clear of the front of the tender and no longer causes the loco wheels to be lifted.

 

Many thanks for this - really helpful. I was thinking of using some Trix grease on the gears - do you prefer oil....?

21 hours ago, 313201 said:

For the Bachmann A1 the rods only really need lubrication now and again so no worries there.

 

As far as the internal workings are concerned there can be several causes of noise or jerky running, any of which could be the following :

 

1, The motor may require lubrication of the bearings.  Caution, do not lubricate the motor at the wired end, this will cause the brushes to get gunked up very quickly and will smoke your motor, therefore, only lubricate at the worm gear end.

 

2, The gear cogs may be dry which causes a grinding or cogging sound, again some lubrication with oil or grease suitable for model locomotive gears will help a lot.

 

3, The pickups may not be making proper contact with the driving wheels, some minor adjustments to these may be required aswell as cleaning the back of the wheels.

 

4, You haven't mentioned whether your layout is standard dc or dcc ( digital command control ), you will see a socket into which is fitted an 8 pin plug if you run on dc or a decoder chip with a few multicoloured wires plugged into it.  Whichever is fitted into your locos, a light press on the plug will ensure that there is a good connection as sometimes the plugs are not always properly fitted which causes a bad connection.  Also if you run standard dc wiring and do not want to use digital command control ( dcc ) then those 8 pin sockets can be completely removed and the motor wired directly to the pickups, if you do this, cut the wires as close to the socket as possible as this will give you plenty of wire to work with and if you get stuck wondering which way to connect the pickup wires to the wires from the motor, strip the wires, put the loco on the track, set the speed control to forwards and touch the pickup wires to the motor wires and it should go fowards.

 

If the loco goes backwards then its simply a case of swapping the pickup wires over and connecting them to the motor wires and once tested and the loco thengoes forwards with the controller set forwards its job done.  You can use heat shrink or insulation tape to cover the soldered connections of the wires but if using heat shrink this must be placed on the wires before soldering them.

 

I have the Bachmann Tornado locomotive and as I do not run dcc I completely removed the decoder socket and wired the motor direct to the pickups in the procedure described above but went further with my loco and even though Bachmann steam locomotives do not need tender pickups, I made and fitted pickups for Tornado's tender which once they were connected to the motor improved the running which is now much smoother.

 

When I compare my Tornado locomotive to another Bachmann A1 I own which is numbered and named as 60153 Flamboyant, this loco is much different to Tornado as I coupled it to a Hornby scotsman tender drive converted with a cd motor and it goes like a bolt of lightning around my layout so it felt like I had to learn to drive it, luckily that didn't take too long to do.

 

My apologies for the digression and I hope theabove tips help, however, if not then please do ask any questions you may have. 

This is really helpful - thank you for taking the trouble to respond.

Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere - I did search the site first but couldn't spot anything relevant.

I own four Bachmann A1's - one brand new which seems fine on running in, and three second hand. I don't know much about the service record on those three and one at least seems a little rough - noisy - jerky and very wobbly.

Whilst I'm good with my hands - I actually have very little experience of working on model locomotive mechanisms. Before I begin 'improving things' can anybody make any useful suggestions on this topic.

Should I just swap out the motor/gear box for newer or can they be improved?

Are the valve gears and drive rods likely to be an issue - can they be fettled to improve running?

(Lubrication is an an obvious issue already covered)

Many thanks in advance for any suggestions.

Evening all,

Just as I sat down to begin a further set of planning I was struck by a curious thought - which led to a question?

As I am currently unable to physically lay track on a baseboard (too much else in the way) I am totally focused on building a stock collection which will populate my layout when I finally get to it.

Not content with filling drawers with boxes - I research and document my work in odd moments which has led to a curiosity about others in the hobby.

Bottom line is I now have multiple spreadsheets allowing me to consider whether a new model will fit into my chosen time period and location (May 1957 ECML Fenland) with links to online resources such as https://www.brdatabase.info/index.php and https://www.modelraildatabase.com/.

Unable to lay a point, or weather a line side structure when the moment takes me I can quickly open a sheet and double check if I want this item https://www.hattons.co.uk/98107/hornby_r3303_class_d16_3_4_4_0_62581_in_br_black_with_early_emblem_weathered_/stockdetail.aspx if it appears in a shed snapshot for May 57, or if it would need renumbering/naming.

So my question is, and this was posed by my wife, am I the only enthusiast in the country running multiple data collection in this way or are there others out there?

There you go - all excitement...

Morning,

Of all the ideas for an urban layout in Mr Rice's book, his N gauge plan for a 'Calder Valley' type of scheme called `Bankdam Mills' caught my attention the most. It was ambitious but somehow simple in the track plan, but most of all looked as if it would be spectacular to view - the industrial worker's terraces climbing the hill side of the Pennines and the viaducts crossing the canal/river in particular. The use of gradients to create a hidden but easily accessed fiddle yard was also very intriguing.

So my question for the community is, has anyone built it, or planned a layout on that basis?

If you don't know the plan, its in this book - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Designs-Urban-Layouts-Iain-Rice/dp/190287708X.

(I hesitate to include an image of the plan to avoid any copyright infringement)

Sam’s Trains. 
 

Over 100,000 subscribers to the channel and 18,000 viewers in less than 24 hours for the last instalment. 
 

What that tells you is that he has consistently produced content that people want to watch. 
 

What it reminds me is that this hobby is a very very broad ‘church’ and that for every P4 specialist focused on reproduction of a prototype as an art form, there are dozens of enthusiasts watching Tornado rush round a small oval on a Hornby trakmat and enjoying the results.

So Sam has his place, and he is welcome to it, although it may not suit you or I.