Flying Pig

12 hours ago, Railpassion said:

Hornby seem determined to miss opportunities and deny themselves sales. The range needs to be coherent. 

 

Flying Scotsman is all very well but nothing steam for GWR or Southern is crazy. A Pannier tank would sell like hot cakes.

 

And then this text describing a home signal on today's announcements 

"The red arms are often seen before signals with yellow arms, which signify 'distant' or 'caution'. A semaphore signal is used as per early GWR and LMS operating days"

 

Are they paying these people?

 

Now if they had said "The red arms are often seen in advance of signals with yellow arms, which signify 'distant' or 'caution'" all would have been well.  As it is, the yellow arms signify 'far away' and nobody has any idea what's going on.

On 28/03/2024 at 17:55, Anthony said:

As far as Cetti's Warblers are concerned, the Common has had a new lake for the last few months, which may explain it!

 

I find the whole thing such a delight when all of these are heard from my back garden.

 

Oh yes, and a Chiffchaff.

Depending on when your app identified it, Redstart is quite possible, since they are much more widespread during migration (April-May and August-October) and may pitch down in any suitable habitat.  Scrub or hedgerow or even an isolated bush with rough grass adjacent they can feed on seems to be favourite, but you can even find migrating males singing from taller trees in spring.

Exeter Central shown here on the SRS site.

https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/srm/S3431.htm

34 minutes ago, moawkwrd said:

I'll have a play around and see if I can work a headshunt in, as well as the fiddleyard arrangement - valid points, thanks.

 

Don't worry about the headshunt - it was quite common for small yards like this not to have them.  Shunting would be carried out by the engine of the stopping goods any way so blocking the main line probably wouldn't be an issue.

I would have a play with moving the diamond and its associated point one space to the right in order to give you a longer second siding in the main yard (and I think you will need to trim off the half straight shown on your plan for clearance reasons).  It would mean moving the platform in front of the siding points to retain a decent length, but I don't think that would be a problem with a very small site like this where trains are not passing.

My mistake - should have looked at some pictures.  I was thinking that the Jinty had the ejector on the left side of the boiler, like most LH drive LMS standard types.  MR it is.

Alan Gibson list an 'LMS vacuum ejector' (as well as Stanier and MR vacuum ejectors) so I guess that's what you want.  Probably worth giving them a call.

7 hours ago, The Johnster said:

There was a standing instruction that, as far as possible, no two coaches coupled together were to be of the same design, and if this could not be avoided, they were to be of different liveries...  There are plenty of Collett designs, admittedly not all produced in large numbers, that are yet unmodelled in RTR form, though Comet's coverage is pretty good.

There are plenty of carriages from every company that haven't been done.  When you add in pre-group designs that lasted into nationalisation, the number of types is well beyond what can reasonably be expected to appear rtr.  There will doubtless be further pleasant surprises in future but there will also always be gaps.

20 minutes ago, Michanglais said:

 

It's currently running under DC, I have got some decoders so may try it on DCC. 

 

It's on flat track with R4 curves. Seems to have the same issue when on the straight as taking curves. 

 

I've tried it with a rake of 3 coaches and it runs just fine, but when I increase to 5, same issue.

 

I shall try chipping it to see if that makes any difference...

 

Could it be a manufacturing issue with your model?  Are all the wheels sitting on the track and do the bogies have enough flexibility to allow them to stay there?   Are both bogies driving?  Have you cleaned any manufacturing residue of the wheels?

There's a good shunting layout on this thread.  It's built in 2mm finescale, but could easily be replicated with ready to use points and flexi track, or even sectional track.  

1 hour ago, MJI said:

Parkside kits

Yup and I mentioned them, but they are quite a bit more fiddly than a standard open or van.  And I still contend that bread and butter wagons like these should be the ones available rtr.

1 minute ago, Cwmtwrch said:

No. 1/149 was a single Lot (3120) of 1,000 welded 21T hoppers built in 1958/9, 100 vacuum piped, the rest unfitted. They had roller bearings; buffer design varied. A number were later given disc brake VB in 1963, removed 1969-70.

Thanks.  In other words, the model is an approximation like most of its Airfix-derived siblings, so probably not worth getting too concerned about livey details.  Just put a string of them behind an original Mainline Peak and enjoy.

40 minutes ago, mikesndbs said:

 

Thanks I found the details now it was part of diagram one/149 lot 3120 a thousand off bill at Sheldon in 1958 so it's odd that it should have the k prefix as you observe

Was diagram 1/149 really built with rivetted bodies to the original design as late as 1958?  Building had generally gone over to the revised BR design with welded construction by then.  The underframe of the model represents the conventional type with push-rod brakes, whereas rivetted bodies mostly had the very characteristic LNER pattern with tall brake lever and clasp brakes derived from NER practice.  See Paul Bartlett's photos at

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/br21thopperrivet

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/br21thopperweld

To bang my usual drum, it is well past time for an accurate range of these wagons rtr in 00 and N (and TT now as well I suppose) as they are typically required in significant numbers.  The Airfix-originated model (as in the OP) doesn't represent a typical vehicle and also forms the basis for the Dapol N gauge version.  The  Hornby model represents the rivetted type quite well but seems to have vanished from the range. The available kits are not simple to build (especially in N) and dont represent all types.  I think there are some nice etched kits in 2mm scale though.

5 hours ago, Sidecar Racer said:

Another accurate prediction from Douglas Adams.  In the Hitch Hiker's Guide computer game you have to beat the cleaning robot to the Babel Fish that has just been dispensed onto the floor.  It's tricky (took me about 7 million years).

4 hours ago, Downendian said:

Lovely morning out fishing it Wiltshire. Aided by the Merlin bird ID app, I’ve identified a pair of Marsh tits looking like they’re preparing to nest. I thought they were coal tits at first but identified through their calls. They’re on the RSPB red list which includes mistle thrushes of which I’ve heard several this morning. A lovely spot for fishing and bird spotting.

Neil

Nice sightings!  Marsh tits are indeed becoming thin on the ground.  I've just had an exchange of emails with a ringer working in North Wilts after I saw a colour-ringed Marsh Tit on his patch and apparently they are very reluctant to disperse more than about a kilometre from where they were hatched.  This makes recolonisation of fragmented habitat difficult for the species.

If you can, please send in your records - see

https://www.wiltshirebirds.co.uk/records.html

12 hours ago, 31A said:

 

That's been my excuse so far!

Hopefully to an ER shed, or you're going to need some LMR coaches for 44668.  Either a football excursion set, or some kind of odd peak hour semi-fast that has been running since pre-grouping times using running powers as suggested by @manna.

Of course, since Finsbury Square is fictitious, you are free to invent whatever other connections you need to explain such a train.

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

That was looking sort of maybe OK for a laugh, until I got yo the picture of the dinner. What the dickens is that!!??

It's why people kept heading West, away from last night's dinner.

3 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

I thought the steam pipe looked a little odd, but didn't notice the difference between the two pictures.

 

It's no good, though. How do the engine crew get up on to the running board? An Austerity only has 4' 8½" drivers. This thing's got 5' 8" drivers, and inclined cylinders to boot.

The Ivatt 4s and last two Caprotti Black Fives had an intermediate footstep attached to the frame.

27 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

 

I could have stared at that for ten minutes and not noticed that and I have two Mainline Std 4s.  I'll be thrown out of Trayne Klub at this rate. Shocking.

(Well done @SteamedLyons).

On the other hand you may be happier and less stressed than the footsoldiers of the Finescale Brigade who haven't had a day off in ages.

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

Not sure it's imaginary, it's 75078 in Haworth Yard on the KWVR.  One of the Southern Region-allocated batch with double chimney and BR1B tender, providing a larger water capacity to compensate for the absence of water troughs on the Southern.

Runing plate lowered and drop ends removed in LMS Austerity style.

5 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

apparently Hornsby have issued a model of that,

Freudian slip there.

40 minutes ago, DCB said:

Generally  3 aspect colour lights are not compatible with semaphores.   UK Semaphores are 99.9% two aspect. Quite often two aspect  colour lights, either two lens or single lens were quite often substituted for semaphores on a one for one basis where sighting issues or "Modernisation" made them  suitable.            When 3 aspects came in they were generally automatic signals controlled by track circuits normally green when semaphores are normally red  and evenly spaced  as the old stations where signal boxes and the old semaphore signals  were located no longer existed.

There are still routes with absolute block sections controlled by semaphore mixed with track circuit block and colour lights.  So if the colour light is placed where I suggested - as a section signal reading into an area of colour light signalling - I think it should be fine. Someone will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong!

Since it's a more modern-looking signal, I'd be inclined to swap it for one of the semaphores on the main lines, probably the one shown on the outer track ahead of the passenger train.  Then use the freed up semaphore on the inner track to protect the siding points, probably just in front of the loco.  I'm guessing there's a semaphore on the inner track, behind the camera?

Exit from the sidings would be controlled by a ground disc, which are very small in N and could be left out, though I see West Hill Wagon Works do a pack.

2 hours ago, kevinlms said:

A class 25 is halfway between 21 and 29!

By that logic a Class 27/2 is halfway between a Class 24 and a Class 31, and two of them make a Deltic.

3 hours ago, Nick Holliday said:

As can be seen only two facing points locks were needed, although it looks like there was one on the point at the west end of the up-platform, which would be required if services from Guildford were terminated and reversed from this platform, as someone suggested.

Along with a starting signal, so presumably that was at least intended to be the case.  Lever 8 on the signal diagram seems to be quite busy.

In model terms, not having to shunt the carriages to the westbound platform reduces play value a bit, but it avoids a movement that would intrude on the fiddle yard.

Just as a mad thought - does anyone feel like replanning this with the whole station spun 180 degrees and the sidings at the front?

2 hours ago, AndyB said:

I'm wondering if the sidings at the station might be refined a bit.

I'd suggest a kick back siding; at present they all come directly off the running rail. 

 

And you might consider a bay platform (departure platform) on the RHS of the station. Branch trains would arrive on the main platform and then shunt into the departure platform ahead of their return journey. Lots more play value for one extra point.

 

 

Actually, it appears to be a goods loop as posted in the OP, but the 25" OS sheet from 1915 shows no facing connection, just a very long headshunt/siding (with some sort of industry at the western end).  Note that it is connected to the eastbound running line within the double track section, thus avoiding a facing point.  Was it later converted to a loop?  Even if so I would be inclined to leave out the left hand crossover and extend it offscene so it doesn't look so cramped.

There is already a loading bank behind the eastbound platform (visible on the photo and included in the plan), so I would be strongly against the addition of a bay.  Trains can terminate and run round here if you want (maybe some peak trains ran beyond Guildford to Cranleigh?).  If they returned as service trains they would probably need to cross to the other platform before departing, but that just adds to the fun.

I would be very tempted to indulge in my favourite planning trick and concentrate on the west end of the station, ending the scene at or even before the platform ends at the other end of the station (obviously the points would need to be included but not necessarily on scene.  This would allow more space for the goods yard, which really looks rather constrained as is, even though at the cost of some scenic modelling.