Dave Holt

Robin, I bet you were cursing! - No wonder the little red smiley(?) - frowny? Anyway, the end result looks brilliant. I can see the tube locations for the pillars that you mentioned at Railex. They look to align fairly well with the holes visible in the floor, although the camera angle is deceptive. Have you checked this, yet? Is there now a set of intermediate spans running transverse to these long, through beams? Keep up the good work, Dave.

Meil, Yes, the one on the left. I've also got some photos showing the other side, from a distance. It looks as if the uprights acted as the buffer contact area and the connecting horizontal beam was on the back face only, as visible in the picture in your link. Thanks very much. Regards, Dave.

Although the track and electrics are far from complete, and the control panel and fiddle yard not even started, I have been thinking about scenic aspects of the finished layout. Following on from the coal drop wing wall, my thoughts turned to the retaining wall alongside the road as it curves round and up to the road junction near the station entrance. Study of a photo taken before the road layout was changed, looking towards the station masters house and down the road to Dobcross and road elevations shown on a site plan have convinced me that I had made the road slope up too steeply so that the road level outside the afore-mentioned house was far too high. Over a period of a few weeks, this has been eating away at me until I have been driven to try to improve matters. It would have been an awful lot easier to get it right in the first place because chopping the finished boards about to lower the road surface has not been the easiest of jobs. It's still not absolutely correct, but a lot better than it was. Due to some interference of immovable bits under the road surface, in the end I was able to lower the extreme top end of the slope by about 20 mm and generally blend this in to the original slope over a length of about 350 mm. The new arrangement is shown in the photo below. Some idea of the lowered road surface can be gleaned from the edge of the strip of wood visible at the end of the goods yard area. Originally, the right hand end of this strip, now suspended in mid air, was fixed to the sloping road. Now there's a gap of about 10 mm. Having corrected this niggling problem, I can now make and fit the various buffer stops to the station board roads. Except for the track which goes through the goods shed, these are of the rail built, BR standard (ex-GWR) type, despite Delph being ex-LNWR. The goods shed road had a masive timber baulk stop which looks like it was some locally produced replacement, possibly for a damaged rail built version. Although this stop appears in the distance in several photos, the detail isn't really clear, so I'll just have to make a best guess. No doubt someone will know better after it's built! Dave.

Dave, I'll look forward to more regular up-dates covering not only your RTR EM conversions, but also other aspects of your very extensive modelling experience and knowledge, from which I'm sure we will all learn something useful. Hopefully, more frequent RMweb input will not get too much in the way of modelling progress. I'm always amazed at the shear amount of RMweb posts that some very prolific models manage to make and still do more modelling than me! Sounds like you and Margaret had a good time at Bottom Chapel. perhaps you tell me more on 12th. Dave.

Robin, These do look very good, indeed. I hope you'll have them with you, for inspection and drooling, over the weekend? Dave.

As part of the scenic work for the station board, the right-hand wing wall has been completed. I'd cut the stone facing pieces from Wills sheets some time ago but have now completed the wall by assembling the two pieces and adding the capping. The assembly has been painted using the sooted stone technique explained to me by Peter Leyland - paint the basic stone colour all over, when thoroughly dry, paint matt black and wipe off using kitchen roll with a vertical action. This new angled section of wall is on the station board whilst the remainder of the coal drops is on the adjacent coal-drop board. You can see the joint in one of the photos, just below the edge of the coal drop deck. Overall, I think I've managed to match the colouring across the joint and then gradually have less blackening progressively along the wing wall where less dirt and coal dust would have been flying about. Behind the wing wall and then along the front of the goods yard, there is an extended low retaining wall holding back an embankment. I'm debating the best way of producuing the retaining wall - which is curved in both plan and in the vertical plane along its length and has an appearance which is not replicated by any of the embossed/printed products I can find - and also the embankment itself. For this I'm hovering between some sort of closed foam material and wire mesh with plaster bandage construction. Any thoughts and suggestions would be most welcome for both the wall and the embankment. Cheers, Dave.

The Comet coupled wheelbase is also stretched to accommodate OO wheel flanges. For my P4 model (which pre-dates the Bradwell chassis), I used Alan Gibson milled mainframes and associated coupling rods, which have the correct spacing (but i don't know if Colin still supplies these) and a mixture of DJH and Comet components for the valve gear. One problem with a dead scale wheelbase is that, like the real thing, the brake hangers have to be located between the back of the wheels and the frames, with the brake blocks mounted on an upward facing massive casting/forging to bring them in line with the wheel treads. The Bradwell kit replicates this, of course but the DJH & Comet just provide conventional etched hangers/brake blocks. As already said, Dave's kit is in every way more accurate and superior to the other approaches, but you might have to make some modifications to the expansion link support brackets, because I seem to recall these (or at least the LH one, with the reversing gear) are somewhat different on the Crosti locos. Good luck with it, whichever route you choose. Please keep us posted of progress. Dave.

It's bee a while since my last post, mainly due to lack of photogenic progress - and that hasn't changed really. However, I have made some steady progress with the wiring of the station board (board No. 4 in my scheme of things). This is now complete with the jumper cables, plug/socket for connection to the control panel, which will be mounted at the end of this board. Due to the position of the panel relative to the bulk of the pointwork and signals, lots of the wires just run from one end to the other but makes the wiring look more complex than it is. Nevertheless, there's certainly plenty of it under this board! I've tried to keep it all as neat as possible. There are two jumpers to the panel, one terminating in a 25 pin plug, the other in a 25 pin socket - not that there are 50 wires, just more than the biggest plug i could obtain (37 pins). The following under-board shots show the tag strips with wires attached to the outer ends from the board and the inner ends to the jumper cables. The cables can be seen clipped in their transport positions, tucked out of harms way. There may need to be a separate ribbon type wiring and plugs to carry the loco number describer info from the cassette fiddle yard to the main panel display - I think you need something like this when driving DCC locos from hidden sidings (loco address and forward/backward info) In order to gather some scenic information, I visited the remains of Delph station yesterday to measure up the roadside retaining walls and try to get a feel for the types of trees/bushes, leaf colours, etc., as i intend to set the layout in April/May time. It's sad to say that the whole station area, with the exception of the station building, has been decimated since my initial visits. I was fully aware that a housing estate had been built on part of the goods yard and in the coal drops area, but I hadn't appreciated just how much collateral damage had been done to the old infrastructure. All quite sad. Still, some very useful information and photos were obtained, which will be a help later in the project. Cheers, Dave.

In order to correct some unsightly gaps in the cut out in the cork underlay, where the goods shed fits, I have temporarily re-fitted the shed. Suitable cork infills have now been fitted. Eventually, the shed will be surrounded on three sides by cobble stones. The total thickness of the cobbled area will be roughly 4 mm so as to be flush with the top of the rails. Similar to Martin Nield's description of the typical L&Y yard arrangement in the latest MRJ, the yard at Delph (ex-LNWR) had a double row of old sleepers between the adjacent rail and the cobbled area, presumably as these were easier to lift than cobbles when track maintenance was required. Whilst the shed building was in situ, I posed a part completed banana van on the shed road to check clearance and running. All OK, i'm pleased to report. However, I'm not too sure that any part completed banana vans ever actually ran to Delph, so this may not be strictly prototypical! The event was captured on film (well, pixels, anyway!): Banana van just visible at the far end of the shed in this view. Back to loco maintenance! Dave.

Larry,<BR>For someone who thinks nothing of chopping coaches about and adding new sides, interiors and details, so only the door hinges and bump stops remain from the doner vehicle, and all in a matter of hours, I'm amazed you find my wiring daunting! There's no more than 50 wires along the boards (the actual number being somewhere between 37 and 50 - too many for a single 37 pin plug but some spare pins on 2 x 25's). As i said, this is partly because the control panel is at the opposite end of the layout to the main track feeds, points and all the signals.<BR><BR>Change to "OO" to save a bit of time? No chance!!!!<BR><BR><BR>Dave,<BR>Nice to hear from you. I've commited to your idea of a truly common return (except the AJ uncouplers). Hope it works when I switch on! I'll ring you on the other progress matter.<BR><BR>Craig,<BR>The layout is wired for both DC and DCC, sellected by rotary switchs on the panel - the only difference being which controller is plugged in and, in DCC mode, switch on all the CAB control sections.<BR><BR>The droppers are bare copper wire, soldered to the back (non-visible) side of the rails. Below the boards, there is an array of heavier duty bare copper wire bus-bars which more-or-less mimic the track layout above. These bus-wires are securred to the brass screws you mention. The droppers and track power feeds are connected to the bus-wires where they intersect, some being local to the screws, others along the wires.<BR><BR>The connecting wires are not fully colour coded, as such, as I didn't have enought different colours for every individual service/duty, but I have tried to keep the main duties to a fixed code:- blue is track power feeds, red for point motor feeds, white for signal actuator feeds, brown for AJ uncouplers and black is common return.<BR>There are plug-in points for both DC and DCC controllers in the facia of the next board along, so there are connections back to the panel for these. There's also a 16v AC supply, a 12v DC supply and the fiddle yard ready and bell-code wires running the full length of the layout - so it all adds up to quite a lot of wires!<BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Dave.

Thanks for the kind comments. The pointwork was done by Tony Wilkins and, as you say, is rather well made - I've only attached droppers, wired up and added the cosmetic chairs. As to whether the wiring works - only time will tell! I've checked continuity and isolation with a meter, but till the control panel is made, true function can't really be checked. During checking, I did find a couple of wiring errors, despite trying to be very methodical and careful. In one case, I'd wired a dropper to the wrong bus-bar. The other problem, I think, was caused by a short circuit between one of the crossings and the stock rails creating a false circuit, leading me to connecting the wrong tag. This caused some very strange connection issues between various sections of rail and the point change-over switch. Fortunately, once I'd cleared the short, it wasn't too difficult to resolve the wiring issues and all now appears to be correct. Cheers, Dave.

After departure of the visiting West Country and its train of enthusiasts, it's back to the slow progress with layout construction. I must say, without the station and goods shed in place, it does look to have taken several steps backwards! Since my last post, back in December '10, I have been working on the station board. All the track is now wired (except final connections to the Tortoise moters and AJ uncoupling magnets), cosmetic chairs fitted to the points and cosmetic fishplates fitted to all the track. Next job is to make & fit the jumper cables which connect to the control panel, located at the end of the board near the buffer stops. This choice of location for the panel, at the opposite end of the layout to most of the point-work, means that many of the wires have to run the whole length of the layout - making the wiring look worse than it is! With regards to the cosmetic chairs and fishplates, after some deliberation, i decided to only fit them to the visible side of the rails - cheating, I know, but it saves quite a bit of work and the back side of the track will never be seen, even by the operator, so why bother? Here's a few photos to illustrate progress to date: First, a couple of views of the platform release cross-over, now with chairs and fishplates. Second, some views of the wiring underneath. In some of these, the board is connected to the adjacent board via the jumpers as it was easier to identify the connecting wires from the tag boards than by trying to identify the plug/socket pins. I've also been having some further thoughts about the rodding from the ground frame (near the buffers) to the cross-over. As far as I can see from photos, there were no compensators fitted to the real thing, which had me a bit puzzled. Closer examination of the photos shows that the rodding from the frame extended beyond the toes of the nearer point and the rodding crossed from the six foot to adjacent to the platform face under the switch blades, enabling approximately the same length of rodding pushing as pulling, thus avoiding the need for compensators. (Hope I've got this right!) There will be a lull in layout work now, as I need to check my locos over, ready for a run out on Dewsbury at Scalefour North (with a test session beforehand). Dave.

EM Metro tank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Forget that, we need more Barrow Hill! Seriously, pictures look good and I notice a bit of track creeping into some of the shots, so definite progress. Also good to see some P4 converted locos beginning to populate the yard. Do watch those return crank angles, though (RH side of WD looks to be behind centre, with the crank at BDC - but could just be the camera angle.) Dave.

These models do look very good - I'm waiting for the power twin version. Regarding "close coupling", in my view DMU's never looked that close. I seem to recall their buffers were mounted on spacers resulting in quite a large gap between the ends of the bodies even with the buffer heads touching. For this sort of arrangement, I've found the Masokits couplings, used in conjunction with sprung buffers, to be an excellent solution. They can be made to suit differing vehicle spacings and can be adjusted for length on a trial & error basis simply by bending the coupling loop. If properly adjusted, they provide automatic coupling (but not uncoupling) making it easy to connect vehicles. Brake & heating pipes are represented by curved wires attached to the copling loop end. Of course, there are also the bar type coupling (including the cast variety which actually look like screw couplings) and non-functions AJ's; but neither has the adjustability of the Masokits version. Dave.

Peter,<BR><BR>Thanks for the kind comments. I just hope I can match expectations with the finished (when will that be?) layout.<BR><BR>I take your point about Vox Mill - far too modern for the period of the layout. Perhaps a Fender Twin-reverb Mill or a Bassman Mill would be more in keeping?<BR><BR>For lighting, I intend to mount a series of spot-lights & maybe some fill-in strip lights behind the pelmet of the "letter box" surround. I must say I hadn't given too much thought to the details at this stage but had a general intention to use "day-light" types and use a similar lamp for illumination during painting/weathering od the scenics. Do you think it's so critical that I need to use the actual display lights for the painting? - Still, quite a while before I reach this stage.<BR>I've just started wiring the station board - all droppers attached (after finding a few un-used holes under the board, despite trying to work in a logical manner I'd managed to miss a few) and connected to the under-board bus-bars. Still got to solder the dropper/bus-bar joints, then it's on to wiring up the tag boards and inter-board/control panel jumpers. No doubt, this will look (and be!) every bit a complicated as the board already wired and commented on by Coachman.<BR><BR>Happy New Year,<BR><BR>Dave.

Looks a very good likeness of the real thing - the current crop of RTR just seems to get better and better. It's getting increasingly difficult to better, or even match, them with kit builds.<BR><BR>On a minor point regarding the tablet exchange gaer - I ssem to recall reading that the catchers slotted into a fixed holder and were only placed there (at what looks like extreme danger to the fireman) on the approach to a tablet exchange location. This was because of the risk of the arm vibrating out of its holder during motion. In any case, there would not be one on each side as all the catchers were to the left (in the direction of running) of the running track.<BR> <BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Dave.

1 in 13 does sound too steep. You could try some haulage tests with the actual locos and stock to make sure they can cope. What you also need to consider is the transition from level track to the incline - especially with six coupled and tender locos. I presume your locos do not have working suspension, so you'll have to make sure you don't end up with a see-saw effect at the top transition or the case where the upper part of the tender hits the cab at the bottom. Either of these is likely to reduce adhesion and cause derailments. Dave.

Larry, Best wishes for your "fitness to run examination" next June - very frustrating, as you say, but it obviously doesn't prevent you working on your wonderful array of coaches! As you can see, I'm taking unfair advantage of Sue's situation to leave sections of the layout on the lounge floor for extended periods! This has resulted in the replacement of Bailey's Mill by a scale replica of the Vox Mill (- it is a so called modelling amp!!!), as you have noted. This mill dates from the very latest era when mills no longer require windows as all - the necessary lighting is provided by digitally controlled internal lighting systems. I'm not too keen on low level/table top height exhibition layouts and my intention is to have the track 1400 mm (4'-6") above ground level with the scene set in a "letter box slot" type presentation. Currently the layout is not just low level, it's a ground level presentation - makes roof detail absolutely critical, but obviates the need for any underframe detail! Don't think I'll pursue this arrangement! I'm immune to any admonishments from Peter about re-built Bullieds at Delph, but I do recognise that even if it stayed there for 30 years or more, it still wouldn't be accepted as a local! Perhaps if I added push-pull gear and used it on the Donkey...... And, therin lies a problem; the Delph Donkey, but the Holt Donkey? Doesn't have quite the same alliterative appeal! Perhaps it would be the Horse, or the Hobit or Hopper? All reasonable suggestions most welcome. Regards, Dave. Perhaps one suggestion would be "get a grip on your use of capital letters"! I spotted several errors as soon as I had posted but can't find a way to edit my reply - unlike when you add a comment. Dave.

Larry, Best wishes for your "fitness to run examination" next JUne - very frustrating, as you say, but it obviously doesn't prevent you working on your wonderful array of coaches! As you can see, I'm taking unfair advantage of Sue's situation to leave sections of the layout on the lounge floor for extended periods! This has resulted in the replacement of Bailey's Mill by a scale replica of the Vox Mill (- it is a so called modelling amp!!!), as you have noted. This mill dates from the very latest era when mills no longer require windows as all - the necessary lighting is provided by digitally controlled internal lighting systems. I'm not too keen on low level/table top height exhibition layouts and my intention is to have the track 1400 mm (4'-6") above ground level with the scene set in a "letter box slot" type presentation. Currently the layout is not just low level, it's a ground level presentation - makes roof detail absolutely critical, but obviates the need for any underframe detail! Don't think I'll pursue this arrangement! I'm imune from Peter's admonishments about re-built Bullieds at Delph, but i do recognise that even if it stayed there for 30 years or more, it still wouldn't be accepted as a local! Perhaps if I added push-pull gear and used it on the Donkey...... And, therin lies a problem; the Delph DOnkey, but the Holt Donkey? Doesn't have quite the same alliterative appeal! Perhaps it would be the Horse, or the Hobit or Hopper? All reasonable suggestions most welcome. Regards, Dave.

Larry, Yes, for a Goddard Street lad, I'm at a bit of a loss to explain my liking for re-built Bullieds, only the re-builds, mind. I think it developed later based on aethetics - in my mind they're very handsome, modern looking loco's but not quite as extreme as BR standards. My infatuation even extends to being a part owner of one(35006)! As for 34027's appearance at Holt, it does involve something of a time-warp, as you say! - Modellers' license taken to extremes although, unlike Delph, Holt didn't loose its passenger service in 1955 - lasting till the Beeching era. Thanks for the suggestions of how east bound excursions could have been worked using two locos. I'd assumed the train engine would haul the stock tender first to Greenfield and run round there (would that have been possible with the track layout?), before setting off east, back past the junction and on up to Diggle. As I've mentioned previously, I've never liked the look of Bailey's Mill - far too dark and satanic (mind you, isn't that how mills are spposed to be?) - looming over the scene. So, whilst I decide what to do, the next building projects will be the row of houses behind the station and the cottage group at Dobcross (shown in your book) which I've moved near to the station throat, to act as a scenic break where the single line exits to the fiddle yard. As Peter has said, we'll be getting together in the New Year to discuss this in more detail. Peter, I see you are now in direct competition with me to see who can take longer to finish his layout!!!!! Cheers, Dave.

Paul, I think it wil be quite a while before a MN appears - got to get the local locos finished first! The problem with 8 is going to be the length of cassettes and fiddle-yard deck required. The longest "normal" train will be an engine + 3 suburban, or maybe the pick-up freight.. On this basis, 2 cassettes plugged end to end would allow for 6 (or maybe 7) 57' coaches for the wakes specials. Even so, the back-end cassette is likely to overhang the end of the layout and be vulnerable to knocks whilst in postion - and probably even more so for the returning departure (to Blackpool, Fleetwood or Llandidno - or even the east coast resorts, with a reversal at Greenfield?) - I'm thinking of a fold-up temporary extension to the cassette yard to accommodate this. For the eastward bound services, it would be interesting to co-ordinate the necessary reversal at Greenfield with Coachman, in real time even? We just need to ensure we model the same stock (hint, hint, Larry, it would probably only take you a day or two to build a pair of duplicate rakes), so the train can depart from my layout and arrive/depart on his. The main stumbling block with this idea is that Coach will have built Greenfield, got fed up with it and moved on to the next project before I've even wired up the track on the next board!! Cheers, Dave.

Coachman's nightmare has come true - when a little known enthusiasts' special arrived at Delph (aka Holt) consisting of an 8 coach rake of southern region stock hauled by re-built West Country class, 34027, Taw Valley. Strangely, this rather unusual occasion was not well recorded at the time and no photos appeared in the railway press of the day. However, photos confirming the event have recently come to light and a selection is attached to this post. The arrival of this train also answered an outstanding question as to the length of the run-round loop at the station. On this occasion, 8 BR Mk1's were safely accommodated in the loop. Normally, the operating department limited holiday excursions to 6 coaches, generally of 57' ex-LMS stock, but made a special concession for this Southern train. The train has arrived and pulled up to the buffers to allow passengers to de-train from the 5 coaches which fit in the platform. Those in the rear 3 will have to walk forward to alight. Taw Valley simmers quietly in the platform. Having pushed back the stock, clear of the run-round points, Taw Valley has drawn forward again, ready to run round. The sun has come out to briefly bathe the loco in brightness. An overall view of the scene, taken from a hillside across the road and river. What did I say in the previous post about fantasy?...... Dave.

Whilst I have the station boards down on the lounge floor, with Gravy Train's superb buildings temporarily in place, I thought I might just simulate the arrival of a through local from Stockport (via Oldham Clegg Street). This service is one of the deviations I'm making from the true operation of Delph, to give a bit more variety than just the motor trains would allow. In this case, the train consists of Stanier 2-6-4 tank, 42551 - one of the darlings of Lees shed, with a two coach suburban train (models not yet finished - no glazing or buffers) consisting of an ex_LMS period I lavatory composite and an ex-LNWR brake 3rd. The train stops short of the run-round points, then the engine moves up to the buffers, ready to run round. Actually, this shows just how far along the platform passengers would have had to walk if this sort of train had actually run. Not much fun in bad weather! Soon the fantasy will have to stop and I'll have to get back to working on the boards to get the track wired up and operational! Still, it's nice to play a bit. Dave.

Jim, I don't think so! Not in my case, anyway. Busses were just things you travelled on when you couldn't persuade your mum to go by train! I remember when I still collected loco numbers, there were some other lads who spotted busses - I thought that was a very strange pass-time! Pots & kettles come to mind! Eventually, I gave up spotting in the early 60's and just went to watch and absobe the atmosphere. Pity I never took much notice of coaches, wagons, signals and other infrastructure - railwways started and finished with locomotives! Ah, well..... Dave.

Larry, I can see that I'm going to need a "bus consultant" to avoid glaring errors - I never paid any attention to them and still haven't a clue! From memory, there were limited stop services 10, 13 & 14 on the Manchester/Oldham/Saddleworth route of which I think the No.10 terminated at Greenfield. Did the others go round via Delph - never went that way, only from Oldham to Manchester. Do you know if there are kits or models out there that could form the basis of a conversion? I see there's a couple of companies advertising 4 mm scale busses. I'm not over keen on frozen action on models, so if I have a bus, it should be stationary at a stop. Was there a stop on the New Road near the station master's house? There was a sort of pull-in area where the goods yard retaining wall cur across the end of the yard, just where the gradient got steeper. Dave.