PMP

Another option is to delay the outbound legs. If they decide on this option then make sure the airline is aware of this rather than just booking new outbound tickets and not showing up for the original date/time. Many airlines now cancel the inbound/return tickets automatically if there is a ‘no show’ for the outbound leg. Obviously there’s the possibility of a surcharge for a late change, but it will keep the trip ‘live’ if the upset is only a day or so.

Unfortunately due to the weather I couldn’t get to Uckfield and was looking forward to seeing the Rice layouts together. I saw Butley in its early days probably at a London City Uni Scalefourum. When I read you were refurbishing it I did wonder how your work would blend with the original. From the images here and elsewhere it looks an excellent and sympathetic mix. Seeing you’re considering Dinghams this is how I’ve got on with them, https://albionyard.com/2018/12/29/notes-from-the-man-cave-getting-to-grips-with-dinghams/ Downside is that stock has to be handed, which hasn’t really been a disadvantage for my layout, and probably won’t be on Butley. You do need gentle curves for uncoupling to work, or straight track.

New (second hand) hoppers arrive at Guyzance.

And much the same could be said of the 74xx’s too, with the addition of the cab and bunker would need to reflect those differences too. I’ve seen images of 74 no top feed and shirt button, and G W R presumed black with top feed, but can’t recall top feed + shirt button on a 74.

This is the Coopercraft one, it takes CD75 rail.

I think this is a massive part of it, it’s sort of American heritage, aruabky becoming folklore, Route 66, Marlboro Man, waisted glass Coca-Cola bottles and Santa Fe streamliners all have that good Americana vibe. They’re recognised for what they are too, toys, so three rail doesn’t matter, but have a real connection to a homely, idealised USA.

The term cameo layout in UK speak was really ‘pushed’ by Iain Rice and it’s been popularised since around 2015. It particularly came into use in the run up to and subsequent publication of his book https://albionyard.com/2017/01/13/creating-cameo-layouts-iain-rice-wild-swan-books/ In simple terms a cameo is (from the MRJ cameo competition rules), one where: The 3D modelled scene is combined with a 2D backdrop. Complementary fascias, wings and other display aids set off the modelled scene. Carefully considered and built in lighting provides natural illumination for the modelled scene. Necessary offstage areas or staging tracks are built in to the layout. Support structures display the model at a "natural" viewing height. Necessary electrical and mechanical "gubbins" are built in to the layout. Dimensionally as my Albion Yard was considered a large cameo layout, they could be up to 9ft in length. The emphasis of the cameo descriptor or label being very much presentation oriented. Longwood Edge, above is cameo and was a frequently used example including in Rice’s book. Micro layouts are by their very nature compact but the description emphasis has been far more towards the physical footprint, rather than the presentation style, which was/is much more varied. This is Shelfie1 and with a footprint of just over 4ftx1ft was often described using both terms, I preferred ‘Cameo’ as it for me, is too large for my interpretation of Micro, which I tend to associate with inglenook puzzles and similar more open styles, of the type associated with Arendt et al. Other Cameos of mine are Shelfie 2 6x2ft Shelfie3 12x2ft Shelfie4 6ftx1ft All the above Shelf layouts are built and presented using the ‘cameo’ criteria above, but definitely don’t fall into a ‘Micro’ classification in my mind.

Pretty much the definition of the internet provided by a bloke who’s surname, (if he’s not using a silly name), appears to be digital.

No none of them do have urban approaches or those you listed yourself. At the time bombers like the B29 wouldn’t have been based at LHR, they were the nuclear deterrent, hence being based where they were. Balfour’s ace card in playing this one actually removed Bovingdon Herts (as subsequently became the hold and navigation aid), from the equation too, as that was expected to be the London Airport, and had already commenced regular commercial traffic, including trans-Atlantic flights. Gatwick at this time wasn’t considered a player. One problem all airports have is planners and developers, they frequently endeavour to build as close to an airport as possible, hence the growth of west london directly under the eastern departure and arrival routes.

I'd go for wiring up some simple on/off switches to get some DC playtime with the layout. This will do two things, get you playing with multiple trains and formations and really get a feeling of how the operation sequence will flow. This is what I did with mine, and you get a real feel for the layout and any problems you may not have foreseen. These switches are now transferred to the control panel. If I want to run DCC all I do is turn them all 'on'. Simultaneously I'd fit 3 link/screw couplings to the longest vehicles you have and 'play' with those. If you have lengthy vehicles like birdcage stock on medium radius and Peco slips, you may well encounter buffer lock, especially on the reverse curves. The shorter three and four wheel stock I doubt will be a problem. Not only will you find out if rear platform 3 links work for you, you'll know how they operate through the station throat. That will tell you if they are a viable coupling system for your layout. If the rear platform has a canopy between you and the vehicles coupling is likely to be a pita, conversely uncoupling is easy.

I would have no problem buying another contemporary Dapol OO terrier. Finesse and fidelity under your criteria are spot on, I'm not aware of any major howlers. Controllability and mechanicals, again mine has shown no issues at all runs on small shelf layouts. Control is Gaugemaster W. DCC fitting/sound don't know, not my circus. Graham Muz does a good piece here on them, with the Dapol one just edging it. https://southern-railway.com/2020/05/18/another-terrier-a1-a1x-class-takes-to-the-rails-of-sheffield/

I wouldn't worry about it, he was just trolling by his own admission.

You have just given a politicians answer though. I asked you for your personal thought on that number, assuming you're not trolling, to come up with your tax thought you must have an idea on this notional number of who should pay, and where that line would be drawn between a settlement/urban area or countryside.

You're more than welcome, I think a good quality survey could produce some interesting insights into how 'we' do and perhaps should travel to shows and take into account if we can do things better. But this one is just a blunt tool but still I think some interesting numbers coming out.

What is the countryside? What is the size of settlement? Simple question, you have an idea that revenue should be generated by people living outside urban areas. Lets accept that, what is the number of residents you have in mind for that cut off point?

The poll was just quickly run up off my phone using the forum facility, so as mentioned in the original piece it's just a quick overview. I don't know if there's a better format easily available, and if the poll is worth re-running. However it's clear that you would have a relatively small 'carbon footprint' as an exhibition visitor due to you using public transport. For events like Gaydon a visitor could attend by taking a taxi, however I realise that is likely to be unrealistic for cost reasons regardless of practicalities.

So you want to financially cleanse the countryside of people, and make it so its like Cornwall where the rich can afford local houses just for holidays, and locals can't afford to live there. Locals who don't work on the land, they presumably move to larger settlements, which become even larger, putting extra strain on those local infrastructure requirements. So what size of settlement are you using to determine your policy? What is the minimum number of residents you need before you cross into your extra rural tax band?

Don't be silly, you cover the land with solar panels to generate electricity for all the townees, there's so much nutritional value! At least thats what they are doing round here, and there are plenty of planning applications for more. You also need to define what's unsustainable and 'in the sticks' they're lovely glib statements to roll out as required. I live in a town or village depending on what official criteria you use of 3,000 people. We have shops and primary and secondary schools, pretty much self sufficient. However we can still get out packet of Peco fishplates next day from Amazon just like our urban dwelling amigo's can, that's our human right or something innit? The secondary school actually has pupils travelling by bus to our school from a town 7 miles away of 23,000 people. Surely they should go to school there, or pay an extra fee to use ours, its not our fault our school is better.

You’re obviously not an expert. Some of us have actually done this for a living, and deal with facts rather than knee jerk tropes. Please show your Nox diffusion tubes results to back up your statement. A picture that hasn’t been adjusted to high contrast would be nice too. I’ve watched thousands of B737NG departures and not one has ever left a trail like that.

The locations you’ve listed weren’t built with the late 40’s bomber deterrent, they were existing stations and primarily transport command. Heyford did go to USAFE fairly early on. The immediate post war bomber provision was from the Lincoln and also a batch of second hand B-29 superfortress aircraft. They were called the Washington by the RAF and were early underpowered variants, which were operated for around five years prior to the Canberra coming on line. They (B29’s) were based at Marham in Norfolk, and either Cottesmore or Coningsby and as a stop gap there were relatively few of them.

Oh dear… As previously explained, the Uk including the aviation industry has signed up to net zero, whether you agree with that or not. Reducing emissions is key for an airport as that is the biggest factor in their environmental impact. Part of this is encouraging and influencing people onto public transport (PT). To do this you need to get them out of their cars, those, your and my car, being one of the biggest pollutants at an airport. So the provision of good PT are major factors in the current developments at airports. Prior to the 90’s, they were a nice to have. So to minimise car usage, fees are set for drop off and short term parking that are high to discourage car use and switch people to PT modes. The revenue from these charges goes into community support, and airport environmental improvements. All reasonable size airports in the Uk operate a similar system, some have a recirculating charge to prevent people going out, round a roundabout and back in. Luton in the mid 90’s was very lucky to survive, early 90’s they were moving something like 1.5m pax per annum. The recession and Ryanair moving Uk base to Stansted, massive reduction in charter holidays, Royal Mail hub closure, and Monarch engineering moving to Manchester left in real danger of closure. Myself and three others whom were training as Air Traffic Controllers were made redundant due to those circumstances. Luton took a chance by assisting the launch of the easyJet services, which surprised everyone with their success starting with only two aircraft. Without that, Luton today would be a housing estate. Today Luton moves 18 million passengers per year. It’s the fifth busiest UK airport and they’re doing that though a very physically constrained site. Some numbers for you for Luton. 17million pax/year immediately pre covid. NB they are already back to around 1m pax per month. 17million. Thats roughly 50,000 passengers per day, 25k arrivals and 25k departures. 8 million of those annual passengers use drop off. Roughly 12,000 private vehicles per day going to drop off, and roughly 12,000 vehicles going to collect. All in the ground space of a large retail park. So yes, it’s entirely reasonable to have discouraging drop off and car park fees. The remaining 9 million are pretty much equal over car parks, bus, and rail access.

@Geep7 This was what prompted that particular question I read that as deliberately not providing parking for general visitors. I’ve assumed that blue badge parking would be covered if space on site available.

Well LHR rail link was originally a BR project to link Paddington and Heathrow to minimise journey times. That was its prime design function in the late 80’s so looking at it with today’s eyes is pretty unrealistic. Traffic levels and expectations are nothing like those of the time. Had the Roskill Comission been followed Heathrow would now be at Cublington next door to Milton Keynes, but it wasn’t. Strategically for UK PLC it should have been. Successive Labour and Conservative governments have wasted years and billions of pounds in prevarication regarding London’s aviation requirements. No change there then. The local development has grown around the airport, not the other way round. Traffic levels and existing technology throughout its operating, have developed the airport into the two runway configuration of today.

With respect you’re missing it by a mile. Try this one as well. The ‘proposal’ is that exhibitions could do far better in their environmental impact. The discussion above, including not providing parking, are some of the thoughts.

We’re on the same page, trust me 🙂 The conversation started from posts like this in the Gets thread. But as we can see from the answers on threads and the poll that I put up, that there’s no simple paradigm shift. The collective ‘we’ do have an environmental impact with exhibitions. Could we do more, possibly, but really not much, and some proposed solutions, closing car parks, might actually make people outside the hobbies life worse, with issues such as fly parking. Best rgds PMP BS7750 award winner 😉