Flying Pig

Nice choice of livery but not quite perfectly executed on the display model, I think. The positions of the numbers and tender lettering don't look right to me as the prototype photos show they should be on the same horizontal centreline, but they clearly aren't. Also is the lining on the LH cabside a bit skew wiff? Niggles, but on a model of this general standard they should be right.

Googling "report bird ring" yields https://euring.org

Ditto. I didn't really need all those pumpkins anyway.

That's very well done - they've really created the impression of tbe train rolling under gravity. Nice to see the light engine moving off before the carriages have quite stopped too.

Nightingales should all be gone to Africa by now and don't sing after early June anyway (and usually from deep cover). More likely a robin as they sing in autumn to define and defend winter territories and will sing all night given artificial light.

Quite likely that very one, Clive. Why I was reading a 2013 post I have no idea, but it's comforting to know I'm not imagining things just yet! I look forward to seeing the new one.

I'm sure I've seen photos of a scratchbuilt LNER coaling plant like this one recently, but I can't remember where - it could even have been on RMweb. It's a pretty compact setup. Alternatively, there were a lot of light engine movements in steam days - inconvenient in real life, but fun on a model - so coaling elsewhere is fine if local facilities aren't available.

The first scale motorised horse will sell like hot cakes (provided it is sold in the livery of a biscuit factory). Of course, some will complain bitterly that it only works on DCC, or has overscale hooves, and many will indignantly demand a donkey instead. Others will remark wistfully that they scratch built one from yeast cells in 1976 and bemoan the lack of enterprise among the current generation.

As previously mentioned in this thread, they are pretty close to LMS Period 2 vehicles in style. I used to run one of the later rtr versions with the Airfix LMS non-corridors when the latter first came out and it was really only the roof profile which stuck out badly in comparison. The LMS did apparently build a number of 54' thirds and brake thirds for general service, so the length isn't too much of an issue either if you want to mix them with 57' stock. A plain elliptical roof section is available in the Comet range (now sold by Wizard models) and you'll need torpedo pattern ventilators in addition to the door vents already present on the body moulding. Contrary to The Johnster's preference, there should be a continuous curved rainstrip each side (see e.g. the Dapol non-corridor coaches which are also period II). LMS bogies are available in kit form from Comet and rtr from Bachmann.

Someone built an L&Y 2-10-0 on a Hornby 9F chassis back in the 1970s and wrote it up in the late lamented Model Railway Constructor. It was a good model and a very impressive beast, based heavily on the Belgian Type 36. Mike Edge's Lanky 0-6-6-0 Mallet has already been mentioned in this thread of course.

The 2nd gen HST is a good idea, but I feel it would be more enraging if based on Mk4 stock. The 91 livery might look better with the angle reversed at one end so the colours formed a sheared rather than tapering block.

Just such a signalman appeared on a Scottish branch terminus layout also featured in RM. As I recall, the mechanism also slid open the signal box window.

It's a domeless boiler - what you see is the top feed.

Clecklewyke is indeed a current RMweb user. His Digital Crispin was inspired by Peter Denny's original but was created as a computer program for Clecklewyke's old Bradford North Western layout. It worked through block bells and instruments to control traffic between a fiddle yard and terminus. The original Automatic Crispin was an electromechanical device of great wondrousness, like a cross between a player piano and a twin-tub washing mashine, but with trains. It may still exist with the rest of the layout (the curator of which also posts on RMweb).

It (OP) all sounds very logical and reminds me of Clecklewyke's "Digital Crispin" which was described in MRJ many moons ago. Given that you don't plan to use real world train staffs, it could probably all be done in software* and I'm wondering how much is already provided in available train control systems. Someone will no doubt know. *or maybe you yearn to possess a 5 foot tall lump of red-painted cast iron, and who can blame you?

That looks very good. I love the slightly wandering high street.

Just caught the second trio on Youtube and wanted to bump this thread as it deserves a lot more attention. Your dad's models are absolutely beautiful.

An anglicised version of that, enclenchment, really deserves to be in common use. The locking frame could become the enclenchment engine. The BoT would require points and signals to be enclenched.

No - reclinin' on a sofarrr, restin' me wooden leg on a dead man's chest and suckin on pieces of after eight.

...me laddie. Avast behind! This bein' the 19th day of September, 'tis International Talk Like a Pirate Day of the year two thousand and seventeen. How be ye scurvy lubbers marrrkin' the day? I be dyin' me agin' beard back to its native red, sackin' a Spanish treasure ship and sinkin' a quart o' rum befarrr me apostrophes runs out.

Have you tried turning it upside down? It might be something quite ordinary.

This sort of thing. Sorry I don't have software on this PC to annotate the plan but - the end curves are 2nd radius for the rear half and 3rd in front; the short extra pieces at each end are flexi at 24" radius to provide a short transition as well as creating space for the platform; - the platform obviously goes at the bottom; I imagine it accessed over a level crossing at the right hand side with fairly limited buildings - the long siding at the right crosses the access road to an industry such as a dairy, feed mill or whatever

Fair enough - the maths does not lie. Thanks for the clarification.

Better tell Peco, then, as they appear to be completely taken in http://www.peco-uk.com/product.asp?strParents=3309,3322&CAT_ID=3327&P_ID=17449

Given the space you have, particularly the rather limited width, would you be better off modelling a single track branch? A single platform on the outside of the circuit with a goods loop inside would still allow you to shunt while a train circulated and you wouldn't be trying to fit a platform and goods loop end to end. You might be able to use streamline points on the scenic section for better appearance and possibly a mixture of 2nd and 3rd radius at the ends.