10800

For someone promoting the use of statistics you seem to be relying on cherry-picking. Yes there has been discussion about poor running in Scalefour News (and the problem with that is what exactly?). It's hardly a problem limited to P4 is it? Yet you don't seem to like 'one person' who is looking for a practical if maverick solution to his own situation - it is his train set. Unfinished layouts - well, we've had views on both sides of that which is healthy. What can an exhibition organiser do to please everyone? I was wondering when 'the attitude' of P4 modellers would come up. It does eventually in threads like this, even after 40 years. So, cherry-picking again, you seem to want to associate P4 modellers in general with those comments?

Maybe we should pause now and come back to go over the same ground all over again next year.

It's never as simplistic as that. Lots of factors involved, some of which have been aired in this thread (and the one in 2016, 2015, 2014 ...). 1) Just because the overall membership is increasing doesn't mean they all can/will come to Scaleforum. 2) The Railex effect. 'Why should I go to two shows a year at the same venue'? I don't get that one myself, but there you are. 3) For some reason, Leatherhead apparently attracted more spontaneous local family 'let's go to the model show' attendance. The Scaleforum management team and the Scalefour Society committee are fully aware of all these factors and more, and I have every confidence that they (with input from the membership as appropriate) will come to a sensible decision, if indeed one is needed at the moment. All that said, I went as always with a large contingent of our area group from Devon, and as always had a great time.

Very nice Tim - a bit more than a 'cabin'! I look forward to seeing more progress and visiting the real thing some time.

Clever though!

And then you move to the side ...

Not that you can tell from this ...

Sharp curve, superelevation, slow speed - nearly all trains squeal.

A bit late with this video (I needed a new card reader to transfer from camera to laptop) but here is the train passing Teignmouth last Thursday

Resurrecting this thread as I've just been down there on holiday again. Measured up this crossing keeper's house at St Martin de l'Arcon for a future project, much to the amusement of passing cyclists on the voie verte ('Vous l'achetez?'). This also has what appear to be conserved 'roll-across' gates. This seems to be the pattern for smaller stations on the line too, such as Colombieres-sur-Orb. There is a resin kit for something very similar by Artitec, but I think I'll make my own. The bigger centres like Olargues have more substantial station buildings. This is the former station at Mons La Trivalle, now part of the mayor's office. Bedarieux was very pleasant with its overall roof We took a ride to Millau on this service from Beziers to Clermont Ferrand, with Z7300 17364. At Millau there were still some old Midi catenary 'hoops' We came back on Z2 97383

I didn't know I was demonstrating until a few days before when John said he was bringing a card table (what? - bridge, poker, snap?) but it was very worthwhile experimenting with various options for making 1,250 3rd rail chairs/insulators for the viaduct. A number of visitors dropped by to ask questions, pass judgement on my sanity, and best of all make some very helpful suggestions. Revelation of the day was finding out you could fit the Peco chairs with the Peco Code 60 rail upside down, i.e. with the flat bottom on the top and thereby showing the same head width as the Scalefour Society conductor rail - otherwise the former looks decidedly thin in comparison. Result. We can cope with the compromise in areas where the third rail won't be scrutinised too closely. I'd missed the last 2 years, so it was good to get back. Well done to Stu and the team. Should've bought Andy's sound-fitted Deltic at that price, even if it was blue ...

Andy, I don't think you are changing the essence of Hope Mill too much at all, and updating scenics can only be a good thing. The C, Hs and Birdcage set will be entirely suitable for HM (aka Goudhurst?) - if I recall Martin had an ex-LSWR 0395 class on it, which always struck me as a bit out of place. Nice loco all the same.

Good luck with all this Andy. I saw Hope Mill several times and it was a particularly inspiring layout for me, and I was pleased to be able to say so in person to Martin some years later - of course he was typically modest about it. I loved the combination of rural secondary/branch line and 3rd rail electrics (with a Roxey 2NOL unit if I recall). It was also the first time I had seen Alex Jackson couplings. I don't know if it appeared in the press other than the MRJ issue you mention - a shame, it deserved wider coverage. I look forward to seeing it again.

Taz has indeed done a very fine job with those coaches. His reward is to be handed three Comet complete kits to build, two Bulleid dia.2123 BSKs (Comet S4) to go either end of a 1960-ish Newhaven boat train, which would be in green; and a Bulleid dia.2320 CK (Comet S17). This would go in the early 50s boat train and should be in blood/custard, or possibly still in late Southern malachite.

A long long time ago in an RMWeb galaxy far, far away we had one of our frequent debates about 00/EM/P4 etc. Things don't really change, the good arguments are still valid and are interspersed with the same, for want of a better word, prejudices - on both sides. It is of course true that the various standards focus almost entirely on track and wheel relationships, and rightly so. It is also true that beyond that it is still all 4mm/ft scale. I would also argue that adhering to any particular standard, provided you can use the jigs and gauges, doesn't of itself make you a good modeller. Hence the apparent incoherence of seeing a somewhat average looking piece of rolling stock running on fantastic P4 trackwork, or a brilliantly-modelled locomotive perfect in every sense apart from the track gauge and wheel profiles. I model in P4 because of the appearance of P&C work. That's pretty much it. This is fixed, once the train has left the scene you are left looking at the static parts of the layout. I happen to prefer looking at P4 pointwork than the coarser clearances of 00 and EM. Many other modellers will see the difference but it has less of a priority for them, others perhaps couldn't care less about using essentially H0 track (including the sleeper spacings) as long as everything else is fine in their eyes. I'm not especially fussed about wheel profiles beyond the obvious requirement for running - visually unless looking at a steam locomotive head on you are hardly going to notice it. Research is a fine thing, and so much easier these days, but it can descend into pedantry. That's also fine if it's a part of your own modelling pleasure, but projecting it onto others can be unhelpful. "That loco's crap because the real one in that livery in that year only had 450 rivets and you've got 451" - that's extreme but you know what I mean. So having nailed my P4 colours to the mast my other primary joy in this hobby is simply operating and watching correctly-formed trains go by. You can (and I do to myself frequently) argue that that would be a lot easier if my track was 00. But I like the appearance of P4 pointwork ...

Absolutely. I did say it was a work in progress at Crawley. Come and see it at Scaleforum in 2018! And yes the brickwork is very complex on the prototype. We aren't going to attempt to replicate it fully, in 4mm scale it would look ridiculous.

I thought that would come up lol It will be something like this then

Ordinarily I would entirely agree. On this occasion in the circumstances of not having progressed as far as we would have liked (there's only two of us doing this), our choice was either to pull out or to improvise and develop another aspect of exhibiting and entertaining the public. As it turned out the approach we used attracted quite a bit of positive feedback. I would also say that any exhibition is a learning experience although probably not in such an extreme way!

Fair enough, but all the track apart from the fiddle yards was temporary, some of it even put down during the first morning of the show. It was a very valuable learning experience.

Hi Tony I'm completely with you on the desirability of good running, especially on a large layout with big trains running at high speed. With all your locos and stock in 00, and the wish to recreate your trainspotting days, why worry too much about the gauge? We're just kids playing trains in the end. So you do what is right for you. Re6/6 and myself modelled in P4 before we made the decision (bonkers or what) to build a model of the Ouse Valley viaduct and, for good measure, Balcombe station on the other side of a round-roundy. This will be a means of watching trains go by on the Brighton main line - mainly EMUs in our case, but also correctly formed steam-hauled boat trains and excursions eventually. So we hope to add to the existing collection of large P4 layouts in due course after a bit of a hiatus last year. As a taster here are a couple of video sequences of a work-in-progress exhibiting of the viaduct at Crawley last April. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/43107-ouse-viaduct/

Templot has been free for a while now, Tim ...

The fine weather (if cold!) and low tide after the new moon yesterday enables some views of what we are referring to: From Teignmouth looking towards Sprey Point in the middle distance. The potential realignment would skirt the outer edge of Sprey Point. And looking back from Sprey Point to Teignmouth Looking out from Sprey Point. There is still some beach. (The lineaments are not remains of Brunellian civil engineering, just the structure of the natural strata). Looking from Sprey Point to Parson's Tunnel. The tunnel portal will have to be moved to the right together with some realignment of the tunnel itself so that the track is pointing in the right direction as it emerges. That will be fun for the houses above. I have offered NR my Templot services in this respect. Some cliff stability work has already been done of course, with some movement detection instrumentation. Looking back from Parson's Tunnel to Sprey Point.

Thanks for your reporting and insights Tim! Evaluation of coastal currents and sand movement is a bit of a dark art, given the additional influences of tides and wind that might not be so relevant further offshore. Could be that the beach between Teignmouth and Parsons Tunnel might re-establish itself in some form in equilibrium with the new wall position. But what would that do in any case to sand distribution north and south? The spit at Dawlish Warren is already sensitive enough, is that out of range of the impacts from new works at Teignmouth? Closer is the entrance to the River Teign and the port. That has to be dredged continuously to keep the entrance open for shipping using the port, what consultations have been made with ABP if any? I can't imagine they would be too impressed if they were given a harder task to keep it open. Sand bars exposed at low tide between the river and the pier change all the time under existing conditions as it is. So there will be business issues and not just tourism.

Thanks John - or you can download a pdf from here http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Devon-and-Cornwall/