peach james

Of course...and I never see that since I'm signed up Anyway, Hardknott Pass & Honister Pass. On iron...in a roller. James

Not as long as the pair in Eskdale? https://tractiontalkforum.com/showthread.php?t=28046&highlight=HardKnott+Pass (I knew about the thread before...) James

We used them on the Yanmar 3 cylinder 16 hp diesel generators. They worked a treat. No, you couldn't get to the plug...without getting wet. However, you had to run the engine for 30 minutes or so first, and then change the oil. I suspect that they don't get the sludge out very well either, but that was as good as it got. The engines were on stringers on the bottom CL of the boat, with no way to get to the plug... The engines seemed to have happy lives, some of the hour meters were >10 000 hrs running time.

FL9 has 5 axles (I saw it too...and would think of it as a proof reading error, given the model doesn't ACTUALLY have 10 axles...) I put in for UVY and Conflat P wagons- both are notable in their absence, IMO. Especially given that the Conflat P would match the Class 28, and Heljan didn't make one to go with it in OO, so the shrink ray or enlarger would allow for both scales at once. James

I used the handy “tell a mod” feature to highlight some wonderful modeling. So it might be me who brought you to the principal’s notice but it’s your modeling that deserves the notice.

I've got at least 3 at home- a nice german made one that is ex maths department ELSS, probably a 300mm job, and some shorter ones that belonged to Hugh (Taffy), my nan's 2nd husband. They are shorter little things- just 6" long or so vs the longer one that I got from the math department in about 1992. I did teach myself how to use them to some extent or another- the books are around at home still. Generally, the go-to is "mathmatics for the engineers handbook", of the date or later for your trusty copy of said handbook. (I think 26th ed. is what I have...). It's funny though, because I was into my textbooks the other night with the 10 year old- he had to explain 3 different mixtures to me, and hadn't written them down. OK- not a problem...go get me the "Basics of Chemistry" textbook...and I had to explain how to use the index to search within the textbook. Turns out that homogeneous, heterogenous and mechanical are still the same things What a different world from the one that I grew up in...and I know I'm far from "old" when it comes to this crowd ! There are a couple of different styles of mechanical calculators- as mentioned ^, there are circular ones, there are disk ones, there are straight ones. There were lots that were quite specialized- the ones for air nav (and marine nav) are still around, because they are still useful.

Yes, on the west coast of the west coast of the island- so the original Canadian Puget Sound ran from Fishboat Bay uphill. I'm about 4 km east of Fishboat, on the South side of French Beach. I'm about 600m from the coast as well- and hopeful (without earthquakes) that's as close as I get to the water :). I have all the holes drilled- some 1200 3/16" holes. I did a bit of test welding, and have been contemplating gauging still. I have to speak to my dad in Ontario, because while I am fairly confident that at 7.562" will work dual gauge (but NOT any wider !), that still leaves the question of 4.75" or 5". 5" has the advantage of more supply of locos...and the 0-4-0 0-4-0 is gauged at 5" right now. As it's outside frame, regauging it to 4.75 would be comparatively trivial (only the 4 axles to do...with the flycranks and wheels...). I am less than sure about it though- the loco is @#$@#$ big on 5", and going down in gauge may not be that wise for a loco I plan on riding ON to drive... CFB Esquimalt is work :), in the heating plant. I did 20 in the navy before becoming a greasy long haired civvy

For the hunting issue, this is true- because what is happening is the motor is being over-run by the grade, and is trying to be turned by the weight of the train pushing the loco. If there is slop in the geartrain, then it will hunt as the motor alternatively slows down and speeds up. The problem with DCC making it worse will be due to feedback on the motor exactly as explained upthread. Powerbase and Bullfrog snot won't help in this case, or at least not much. They both will work in a normal helix, as they are increasing the adhesive factor- one by providing increased downforce (Powerbase) and bullfrog snot by changing the co efficient of friction. In the model engineering world, there is a wide aversion to using Aluminum wheels, in part because of the reduction of co efficient of friction. The logic of the experiment ^ (of putting locos on top of one another) probably has more to do with the slightly different CoF's of different wheels than anything else- that the profile can make quite a difference as to the CoF due to trapping of crud. (the infamous "wrong type of snow" and "leaves on track" problems...) The issues with 4-6-0 vs 4-6-2's are also well documented- the same thing goes for 4 cylinder locos vs 2 cylinder locos in real life- a 4 cylinder loco is going to be more surefooted than a 2 cylinder loco of the exact same weights. (and an electric even better...). All of this to say, that if your helix is made at a minimum radius, you are going to have problems with it ! Spiral Video by Peach James, on Flickr Rest assured, he's not _still_ in the middle ! (he's also 15 years old now !)

Lovely work Just remember, seeing the Class 24 in the background: Coughs and Sneezles Spread Dieseel's ! (Thanks to the Rev. who taught me that...) that goes for everyone who reads this forum ! James

Lego made one too... the 9V controller

I sent them a message- the RCN's west coast newspaper is called "The Lookout", and has been for yoinks... kind of daft to rename their page, likely to end in confusion. (east coast RCN is "The Trident" ) Where is task force 150? The world awaits... James

Is that JJB who is doing so? I've noticed their absence, thought they were mostly out of the maritime game, but if doing this, is good work to be trying to get done. It's a bunch of @##@$@#4, when we have wumbly politicians who get https://www.thebeaverton.com/2021/01/explorers-discover-uncharted-tropical-island-populated-entirely-by-canadian-politicians/?fbclid=IwAR3s-_BwnmOwhr2CkLqHg03Qp4KJXmGNDEc9c-kWrDRVNA8j9ZzAnEu-fSI written about their poor choices (insert other more sailor like language that the filter won't allow), happening, and sailors can't get home.

I've sent people to look for the golden one...it's in the bilge, I tell you !

We had no problem bringing a layout across the US (from Seattle-Detroit) in 2016. We had enough photos to prove what we took was ours, same goes for stock, but no issue on entry or exit from the US. Digital cameras mean that photos taken the day before the border crossing are easy pickings now- and if you had it before you cross, then you certainly can have it coming back. Even in the late 90's, I didn't have problems with bringing stuff across the border- we're really not something that the border guards are interested in, unless you are specifically selling or buying something of unusual value. James

Conflat P Conflat P makes total sense- in N, to go with the Rapido Class 28, and OO to go with the Heljan ones. Also works with Class 5's...(probably with less smoke, fire, bad language and brimstone than an unconverted Class 28...) But, I'm just guessing like the rest of you

Not a help for the UK- but "Little Canada" in Toronto, Ontario. https://little-canada.ca/ Toronto Model Railway Club (Central Ontario Railway), http://www.modelrailroadclub.com/home.html I don't think that there is a similar one in Vancouver- there had been one in Grandville Island, but that has been gone quite some time. I understand parts of the layout build for the location exist, and are in Revelstoke (?) at the railway museum there. It was no-where near as fantastic as they advertised it to be, coming from a scale model railway guy. Miniature Wonderland would also fall in the abroad groupings James

That means _a bunch_ of relays. That's why I went the way I did with Long Marton- the first plans at home were for mechanical (relay) systems, then I started to figure out how many relays it would take to have the sequential staging loops pass trains to keep them filled, and I blanched, and went for DCC and track sections. Mostly because even though I have some of the background, and had access at the time to someone who most definitely did have the background to do the LLD & math to reduce it to a minimum, I didn't hold up much confidence of getting it all right and working. It can be done, there is at least one example of it here on RMWeb. But, I tend to think that using software is a far easier way to deal than not. The example that I can think of is "Lostock Junction" , if you google it, there should be a presentation about operating it as a scale layout. It is a DC layout (started in the mid 1980's), and uses a bunch of operating positions to acchieve multi train operation. It certainly can be done that the computer "only" runs the signalbox if the closing switch for each box is made. Long Marton is programmed in the main to be run as the Signalbox, with no direct control of the trains happening by the "signalman" (me !) , but being "in charge" of what happens within the signalbox. (and drinking copious quantities of tea !). It _can_ be programmed to do things the exact opposite way too- where I'd be driver, answering to the signals and not having to worry about the opposing train, just to collect the appropriate goods in the yard. The problem I can see with a more conventional DC power system is that each train is going to require your individual attention to advance it. If you view this as a game, then it's the difference between turn based and real time- you cannot manage to run a system in real time, you can operate in turn based time. A great example of that is the AFK on here- it's not a beautiful layout, but it is a wonderful one ! The advantage of interlacing a computer into the operation is that the layout can then move to being a real time layout with a single operator- or multi operators, and the computer replaces any operators who are not there, or would have "boring" jobs. Computer control in this case is quite separate from track power. I would NOT recommend a 11x11m layout be wired for DC, at all. The comparative ease of wiring a complex system with DCC vs DC makes DCC an easy choice for the track powering system. It means that you can wire the layout in logical electrical units (working areas), and only have to worry about which rail (a or b) you are feeding within those units, rather than having to design and build electrical control panels with rotary switches to get enough controllers for multi train operation (4 way, probably...). By using DCC to power trains, it forces obedience to signals and track condition- if not, then the train stops, whereas DC tends to avoid that due to the power routing problems of doing so. It's easier to SPAD in DCC than in DC, because often in DC the signal is interlocked to the power supply for the next electrical section, rather than to the track condition... I'll see if I can crack out a design- it may be in BlueBrick (Lego) software, in any case, it will be far more diagrammatic than scale at this point for ideas. The other question to answer here, I think, is how you envision operating this. Are you thinking you want a layout that requires all your attention at one point, or are you thinking you want a layout you can stand back and watch the trains circulate on ? Is there a scenic feature (tunnel, or viaduct) that defines your ideal? Because if it was me, the walk into the room would be defined by that feature if at all possible- either station, cityscape, marshalling yard, goods yard, engine shed, viaduct, or moorland- that initial head up the stairs view should, to my mind, encompass that. Layouts to perhaps take a look at are Kingston Sub (https://www.facebook.com/KingstonSub/ AFK (Lostock) and I think it is Leeds (City) Midland Side is the other one on here that is DC & has a large relay operated control system. (though don't hold my feet to the fire on that !) James

The first q that I have is _can_ the trains go all the way around the room? Even an 11m*11m space starts to shrink fairly quickly if you have to deal with - 1.3m at each corner. 8m is nothing to sneeze at though- the main scenic part of Long Marton fits into a 36' long room, including similar curves at each end. The advantage of being able to go around the entire "outside" is that it means that you could have trains running from place to place. I would think of DCC and automation as being both very useful in this circumstances. If I was starting with those sorts of constraints (which are close to what I have, tbh), I would do similar to what I have done. I would start with a common module size- figure out what two people can move down the flight of stairs, and go from there. (probably 1m wide *2m long * 0.6m thick or so). That becomes your module size to design around- all the sections of the layout then fit onto that. It means that when you need to wire a section, you can flip it onto a pair of sawhorses, clamp it down, and wire it without being under it. I wouldn't worry about the outside "loop" track being as modular- that is probably fixed to the house. It's just that if you build (for instance) a 15 track staging yard, you won't ever want to build another unless you _have_ to. I would build a double track loop around the outside, with one of the walls having a substantial storage yard. Long Marton's big staging yard is 15 tracks, on 30" wide baseboards. This then has another layer on top of it by 12". Any less is an access problem- but if you design it in now, then you _could_ build another section of layout on top. Then, it comes down to what operations YOU want. If you want a viaduct, that will take a substantial area on one of the walls. If you want somewhere to shunt, that could run up the middle wall on one side or the other. If you want a grand junction, that too is possible. If you want Carlisle Citadel- well, that might not QUITE fit Given that you have a 11m run around each wall, I would be tempted to design around at least 2 levels, depending on how tall the space is (and how tall you are). I'd also consider how old you are- this is not a project to undertake if you are 78 years old, tbh. The other consideration is how much time you want to put into this, and how much money you can afford to put into it. They are basically inverse- if you have lots of time (like say, are 44 years old...) and not much money, then you can afford to spend time instead of money for some things. If you are older or have other hobbies that eat time, I suggest that you will end up spending $ to compensate. If you can find some interested people, forming a bit of a club to build it could be a good way forward. It's going to be in your house though, so it's more like "the JPR, take it or leave it" than a traditional UK club. I know that several of the US design books are probably better suited from a _design_ prospective for figuring out the large chunk bits of this space. If it was me, I would also do what you are doing- ask for help before you start cutting wood. It's cheaper that way I prefer layouts without duck unders- even though I am a 44 year old, they keep seeming to get harder to use. That is certainly a consideration. I'm also a fan of the "mushroom" design layouts, though they require a fairly tall (8' or more) space to work effectively. I look forward to trying to help, James

Hornby 3.5" live steam rocket dates from the mid 1980's. The A3 and A4 date from the 2000's...

Yes, robust enough for moderate public use- Southern California Lego Train Club used (?) to setup at the San Diego Model Railway Museum for 50 days/year, and run trains for up to 8 hrs/day. That's with 9V (track powered), rather than with PF or Powered UP! (no I don't come up with the marketing names...). That being said, think of it as being a toy, and that if it made it to 200 miles running, it's doing good. I tend to not leave trains hammering out miles at home. is how it was set up at one point- being lego, things tend to move around a bit

LBSC's Ayesha, proving that 2.5" gauge live steam passenger hauling was practical- and meaning that Gauge 1 was the biggest Scenic only Scale One of the early P4/S4 plank layouts, for proving that "scale" is practical at 4mm/ft. Early Etched kit (and I know they have been ID'd on here) XO-4 Motor Brook-Smith method EM gauge track Peco Universal OO Turnout NMRA style flat plate gauge Bachmann V2 (?) as the first of the current generation of "model" Locos, rather than train set locos. (Though that could go to Mainline 02 -the first I bought was a Dapol Terrier, what a revolution in RTR for me- anyway, mid-late 80's designed models)

Jeff, As we live in sensible places, today is of course 21/12 Happy Rush Day ! James

So, I found the tape, laid out the rough line of the fill, and have moved about 4 m^3 or perhaps a bit more. The way I've been doing it is to take ride on mower, with a nominal .5m^3 trailer, and put 20-40 shovel fulls of dirt into the trailer, then trip it around and end dump the trailer, or shovel it out. (more often shovel it out...). The trailer is the cheapest thing known to man- they come from Princess Auto, with the fabulous "we're not satisfied till YOU'RE not satisfied" warrantee. (for 50 quid, what do you expect ?) https://www.princessauto.com/en/10-cu-ft-500-lb-steel-atv-dump-cart/product/PA0008476236 (but don't ever buy them at full price...). The track construction- I've finally gotten the last of the tieplates cut. I've got at least 1/2 of them ground off on the ends, so they are no longer daggers to stab me with. Once I finish with that little job, then it's on to drilling the 1200 holes on them. So, I am moving forward...slowly. I've got to speak to dad about gauges- as in, what can I get away with for the large gauge? Because there is a choice to be made between 7.25 and 7.5" gauge, and I need to know if my plan will work. (7.562 gauge, remembering that this will have no turnouts, so as long as the wheels cannot drop into the track, it being wide to gauge in relation to flanges is OK). I've got a bit of a similar debate about the 5" gauge too- and until I sort out the big gauge, I can't sort out the middle gauge, and that means I don't know if I end up with 3,4 or 5 workable gauges. (I'm hoping for 5, but think I will end up with 4)

I have to agree with Jeff on this one- I have some colour photos of Trout Beck taken in 1996, and I have a small sample of roof slate and of lead (with "white" paint) on it. All the colours are impossible to exactly reproduce- except that the Metcalf kit colours are most definitely wrong for Long Marton. That much I do know- they are gray, and the stone used in Long Marton is very definitely brown, or sand coloured rather than gray. Certainly, getting the colours somewhere close is important. However colour perception is a personal thing, and is so very heavily affected by the temperature of the light that the day has. What Jeff wants for Gill Head is a colour that matches HIS memory of what it looks like- or that's how I'd take it. That being said, I think that the colour used ^, is too gray and not brown enough too...but it's my opinion, and those are like your bum- you shouldn't of necessity show them off James

Well, it was the most Russian Kerbal of designs, when in doubt, add more boosters The Nimitz class carriers have 2, much larger reactors, rather than the 8 that Enterprise had. First has it's price - no other ship comes close to the # of reactors. James