billy_anorak59

Very useful Phil - it's going to take some mulling over, but its good that you've had some experience of a similar plan and it's challenges, although I think having a double track to the terminus increases the complexity somewhat for me. This bit interests me, thank you - I'll take some time now to see how it might help me in my application. And thanks to all who have taken the time to write thus far - it's appreciated.

Thanks - some interesting ideas there, although I'm not 100% sure why 4 cabs? (It's not you - it's me ). Also, I'm curious as to where and why a redesign of the terminus might be necessary? I'd be loathe to do that by the way, as it matches my prototype (...to a degree anyway - it's been flipped and mirrored, and lost one platform road - further mangling might mean its unrecognisable).

Thanks for the reply. No, the only crossover is that marked 'X' and ther return loop itself. Of course, there are crossovers in the terminus itself, which I'm hoping 'could' be powered by the red or yellow loop controllers, so that a train could directly leave the terminus, and proceed around the red loop (e.g. cab1), leaving me to 'potter' in the terminus (e.g. cab2), until it was time for the train to 'reverse loop' to the yellow (another train could depart the terminus at this stage). The train could then proceed round the yellow loop (e.g. cab3), until time to be driven directly back to the terminus. Cab 2 would be switched out (or restricted) if cab 1 or 3 was in operation. I was hoping cabs 1, 2 and 3 would be interchangeable with what block they were controlling. In answer to your second question, although I can fully see the benefits of DCC, I can't justify the expense of chipping up to 60 locomotives, plus the control systems, plus the technical challenges of DCC comes into play as well - I'm not at all au fait with the technology. Really, I just want to get things working on DC properly, so I can concentrate on what I enjoy - the scenic side of things. Thanks RobinofLoxley! I'm hoping someone might tell me how! (not that relays aren't a mystery to me too...) They are motorised. I understand I am restricting myself, but DCC doesn't stack up for me (price-wise, and at my age), tempting though it is. Appreciate the replies thus far though, thanks!

Can I ask for some help with this one? I just can’t work out what I need to do to make my layout work as I want it to. As the son of an electrician, you’d think I’d know better, but no – I followed the path of mechanical engineering and the nuances of electricity just don’t sink in I’m afraid. I’ve not been lazy – I’ve tried, really I have, but I just can’t work things out, and a solution must be possible? I wasn’t sure whether to put this in the ‘Help and Tips’ area, but here seems a better bet, so here goes… My track-plan is an old C.J.Freezer favourite - an ‘out-and-back plus continuous run’. All points are PECO Insulfrog to keep things as simple as possible for my feeble mind. As you can no doubt work out by this stage, I’m not very good at anything electrically technical, and I don’t want to get involved in the expense of converting my locomotive stock (coming up to 60 years worth in places – I started out when I was 3) to DCC (but I do realise how nice it would be – sound especially). I suspect that my main existing feeds can be used, but I’m not sure – I’m quite prepared to re-visit those, as everything needs reappraisal – and I hope this is where someone here can guide me or at least clarify? It’s probably best to show the track-plan at this point: The main part (the continuous run bit) of the layout is complete and ‘sort-of’ operational (in a very rudimentary fashion), but the high-level terminus has been used for many years as my workbench, and I really need to get things to how they were always intended to be and build the thing! Therefore, now that the upper board containing the terminus section is to be added – well that’s where my difficulties start, as that section needs to be bi-directional, and the circuits ‘come together’ so-to-speak following a ‘reversing loop’ change of direction on the main layout. The point at ‘X’ is where I get confused. If I was to use a common return as I intended, this will lead to a ‘clash’, and I can’t get my head around a solution. Perhaps, I’m over-thinking, but I very much doubt it! The layout is analogue and I would like to work out the wiring requirements for a ‘cab control’ system of working using a common return bus (although the common return bit is not mandatory, it’s just what I have read as being desirable). I hope to use rotary cab selection switches (in order to get a visual feedback on what controller is switched in for any specific section, and I anticipate that any one of three controllers can control any cab on the layout (either main circuit or terminus). I always intended that, in practice, controllers one and two would be used for the main circuits, and controller three could be used for terminus ‘pottering’ movements. But any controller could be used to start/terminate trains in/out of the terminus. It would be good if the ‘reversing loop’ (effectively a long crossover) could be used without having to stop the train in order to throw a DPDT switch, but I’ve got a complete blank on that too. At present, I have two (double Gaugemaster) panel mount controllers using separate transformers, but one question that I also can’t resolve is if a third transformer would be required for the third (a single Gaugemaster) controller, as I have seen various references stating that a short could/would occur if the same power supply is used between sections that could overlap. To see me into my dotage, I would really be most appreciative if someone could spare the time to give me some help with a wiring diagram that shows feeds and (types of) switches - something ‘done proper’, in order that I will have something reliable and properly designed for the future. Something where I wouldn’t have to crawl underneath the layout to correct faults that I had built in years before - ‘cos I can’t bend like I used to… Sorry for being a numpty.

I would have thought it would be pretty easy to have a flipping or rotating section of bulkhead (driver one side, empty the other)? A la Scott (Rotating) or Virgil (Flipping) in the launch sequences of Thunderbirds?

If we're talking about on-train annoucements: From the BBC Kent website - commuters who have written in to complain about Connex .... (2003) Andy, Gillingham "It just gets better and better. Having shortformed peak time units on the Kent Coast routes yesterday (one of the busiest days of the year as most of the UK returned to work) I arrived at Gillingham Station this morning to witness a sea of commuters. Apparently all London bound services were subject to unspecified delays due to 'adverse weather conditions' i.e. approx 1" of snow and a broken down train blocking the London line atTeynham. Fortunately there was a rather ramshackle eight-car slam door unit standing at platform one which the station announcer informed us would constitute to 7:07am slow service to Victoria. We were all advised to board it as Connex could give no undertaking as to when another service would be available. The train ground through Rochester before seizing up completely and catching fire at Cuxton. As the acrid smell of burning filled the carriages a 'Corporal Jones' sound-alike advised us several times over the tannoy 'not to panic'. There followed an interval of several minutes before Corporal Jones announced that we were to 'de-train'into the Kent countryside. I didn't have my Connexspeak to English translation guide with me but I took this to mean we all had to disembark. An interesting situation this. They only managed to run one service this morning and it spontaneously combusted. After several more minutes Corporal Jones announced that they had to remove a fence for us to walk over a footbridge and away from the line and, oh did anyone on the train have a bolt-cutter? I work for a Bank and the only reason that I would have a bolt-cutter in my briefcase would be if I were weeks from retirement and decided to have a go at the vault. However, I made a mental note in future to carry bolt cutters, a fire extinguisher, bottled water and copious amounts of Kendal Mint cake on all Connex journeys. All were then amused for some 20 minutes watching Laurel and Hardy through the train windows trying to demolish a fence with what looked like a rusty knife and a lump of wood. The confused milling of several hundred freezing passengers on the pavement adjacent to the A289 soon attracted the attention of the Kent Constabulary who arrived in force, 'Excuse me sir but you can't park that train 'ere'. We were subsequently directed to the local Sports Centre away from rubber necking motorists and another potential transport disaster. Corporal Jones announced that buses had been arranged to take us back to Medway until some wag pointed out that the whole point of boarding the train in the first place was to travel to London (if that was alright with Connex). This was followed by much muttering into a mobile phone before Corporal Jones announced that a bus would be provided to get us to Dartford after which we were on our own. My day would have been complete had 'revenue protection staff' demanded to see our tickets as we scrambled along the snow lined embankment."

If it's any use, there is a station announcer soundbite just about halfway through the Supertramp song 'Rudy' which was on the Album 'Crime of the Century'. I reckon that the album was dated 1974, so the recording was probably round about then too. The station sounds to be Paddington, given the destinations in the announcement: "The 19.45 train to Bristol Temple Meads will depart from Platform 2, calling at Reading, Didcot, Swindon, Chippenham, Bath Spa, and Bristol Temple Meads. Passengers for Radley, change at Didcot". As a bonus, the track starts with a brief sound clip of what sounds like a Class 50 too!

Can you post them, or are they copyright? Thanks for the info anyway.

I must admit when I saw your post that that was the area I wasn't 100% sure of either, so I've taken a look at the photos I have. The 'early' condition of the loco (2 grills on each nose side, central 'window' on one (or both sides), and outwardly as a 4-8-4), actually has a panel over this area, so they were no help. The 'later' ('exhibition train' condition and possibly to withdrawal) are inconclusive in some cases, but the exhaust end 'upturn' looks to face left on most pictures that are clear. I see what you mean, but as the engine layout was identical from one end to the other, I can't see why the upturn would face left on one side, right on the other. If it was the case it would be an easy fix, I don't think tooling would be affected too much. Interesting though - perhaps others might have better photographs of this area.

Judging by the last pictures I saw of the livery samples, here: IF the locomotive is the same both sides, and they lose the centre connecting rod (I know its removeable anyway) - I think they've nailed it, and it doesn't need a tooling change anyway?

Can't help there I'm afraid Les - I'm late to the party, as usual.

For what it's worth - I'm about 95% sure that the 'Exhibition Train' shown in the first pair of photographs is en-route to the International Railway Congress Exhibition at Willesden, held May 26th-28th 1954. (The position of the Standard Class 5 in the cavalcade fits too, along with the pristine van - I reckon that's 73050 (later to become 'City of Peterborough' - see http://73050.co.uk/page15.html) The upshot of all this rambling is that I'm now pretty sure that this gives us a known condition of the locomotive (on both sides), and at a known date - and hence an accurate basis for any model of 10100. ...Personal opinion of course!

Thanks Mike - it was worth posting then. I was going to add '4-4-4-4 (outwardly)' to the post as I knew it was still a 4-8-4 or 2-D-2 (inwardly) , but forgot...

Whilst perusing this thread, it struck me how difficult it is to work out the configuration of this locomotive, and therefore how it should best be modelled. Mike Edge, (probably the main authority on the Fell given his research) has constantly stated how difficult it is to determine which side of the locomotive we are looking at, and, in the absence of views of the other side on known dates, how indeed do the sides actually differ to each other at a certain point in time? How can we know a fixed state of the locomotive at a fixed time in order to model it? KR have had my sympathies trying to decide… I then remembered that I had snaffled a few photos off FB some time ago that I hadn't seen before then, and so I took a look at them to see if they could shed any further light on the subject. There are 4 in total, taken in two pairs, but obviously a few years apart – and both pairs of photos show both sides of the locomotive at the same date! (Whatever that was - unfortunately there was no attribution with the pictures) From them we can glean what the condition the locomotive was in at least twice in its life, which may help to nail a ‘default’ or 'safe' codition in which to model the loco in? I’d be interested in the response… see what you all think. The first pair of photos show the locomotive in pristine black, probably in cavalcade to/from an exhibition - so we should be able to tie down a few possible dates, but obviously early 50’s. It does show however that Mike E is quite correct – the locomotive looks to be absolutely identical from one side to the next. It’s got ‘all the fours’ – configured as a 4-4-4-4, 4 large grills at each of the 4 corners of the nose, 4 inlets on the cab roofs. There is a central grill too, on both sides (no ‘window’ either side). Left-facing lions on both sides. Even the position of the worksplates don’t help. The second pair of photos look although they were taken a few years later, as the exhibition finish has now gone, to be replaced by a far more weary one, but still looks to be black (no lining). No location again, but could be Derby? (- if the presence of the Bullied 1020x diesel behind it is anything to go by. Incidentally, the Bullied looks to be in (shiny) green, so that might give an indication of the date? Is the Fell in the works being prepared for a green coat too? – certainly seems ready for one - patch painted?). The interesting thing here is that, although some years later, the loco is still in the same condition as the earlier ‘exhibition train’, i.e. a 4-4-4-4, 4 large grills at each of the 4 corners of the nose, 4 inlets on the cab roofs, plus central grilles too - both sides. So it must have lasted like this for quite a while. So it would seem that this particular configuration lasted quite a few years – indeed, photographs taken of it in the scrap line at Derby match this configuration too… What do we think? Any use?

Consist. Not easily replaced by anything that doesn't sound clunky in a sentence, but it just offends my ears in a 'from the get go' sort of way.

Interesting article here: http://www.merseytart.com/2021/06/ Remembering Birkenhead as a busy place in the 60s, I too would love to see some attempt at regeneration. Don't suppose it will happen (it never does), but I just thought the above link provides food for thought on the opening up of the old dock branch through the heart of town. I'd be interested to hear what others think, good or bad.

Two from me: Latchford (Warrington) in 1983 ...and Chester (No 5, I think?) in 1981

Many thanks! That's a mystery solved. Thought you would have had something to do with it...

Probably one for LNERGE, but the photos in this post reminded me of it... does anyone know where the signal box cabin in Patrick Brothers reclamation yard at Murrow comes from? Often wondered whenever I've seen it, but I have Wisbech in mind for some reason? This one: Of course, there's the old Murrow box just across the road there too (converted into a house).

Thanks for the info re: the Supermarket Bernard, appreciated. Yes, that's a Britains tree, nicked from my sisters' 'Floral Garden' set, and all those MINIX cars meant that there was an empty Triang-Hornby Cartic car carrier circulating the layout somwhere! Note too, the (somewhat blurred) back end of a Dublo Dinky Volkswagen Van disappearing off stage, bottom left. Just looking at the photo now, 50 years on (), I recall that that erm, 'landscape feature' painted green in the foreground was made from a spare dollop of actual concrete that my Dad was mixing for building a brick wall. All good fun!

My first attempt at a 'proper' layout (off the carpet) in 1971 - Superquick to the fore, including the country shops and a (later?) supermarket.

Dockside remains at the filled-in Bromborough Dock, Wirral - including a crossing and location of a wagon turntable. Line (Lever Brothers internal) closed to this location late-60s/early-70s. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Bromborough,+Birkenhead,+Wirral/@53.3556335,-2.9772804,94m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x487ad8cf8fd355eb:0x9bb55bbd9f9556cc!8m2!3d53.3321915!4d-2.9772937

Class 503 plunges into the gloom of the short tunnel on the approach to Dacre Hill. (Yes, I know, there is an 'elephant in the room' here - 3rd rail will appear eventually... honest!)

I'm 99% sure it's Hooton South Bruce - I grew up about 3 miles from it. The station can just be made out in the background, and the pylons around there are a dead giveaway (there are no pylons around the Chester No 1 area that I can recall). Still, there are more versed persons on here than I. This is a view from flyingsignalman's post on 'Merseyside Signal Diagrams' (here: Same?

I'm pretty sure that your Chester No1 is actually Hooton. I expect Beast or TheFlyingSignalman will be along soon to confirm (or not).