Mikkel

A wonderful beast, and it has that look of mass and weight that the prototype has. Seeing it crawl along the trakc must be quite a sight! I don't suppose a video is possible? I missed your earlier post about the Neath & Breacon ST, for a quickie it looks really good. I hope the Dean Sidings concept is doing well commercially, it's really nice to have that kind of thing on the market. Am hoping to do some of the early GWR locos in the range in the future.

Hi Ray, It's really quite small. Some might even say that I have "over-documented" it, given it's small size. But I like the idea of trying to extract maximum entertainment from small layouts. Specifically, the scenic section of "The bay" is 32 x 92 cms, with a 73 cm long fiddle yard. The photo below shows most of the scenic section, and there are more details on the initial construction etc here: http://gwr.org.uk/layoutsbay1.html

I really like this concept. As I see it, the letter-box view is an under-exploited means of avoiding the traditional birds-eye-view (which I think does little for most layouts). Making the front corner rounded as suggested above sounds like a good idea, eg: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nevardmedia/4014228666/in/set-72157622241440317

Thanks Steve! Edwardian is such a great period to model, I find: Great liveries, elegant designs, varied stock and short(ish) trains. I suppose there's a risk of romanticising it all, but as modellers I think we're allowed to be a bit selective at times...

Sad to read this Ian, but it's still a wonderful tribute to make.

Very nice! The Aidan Campbell figures look well painted - any chance of a close-up of them?

Congratulations! I'm green with envy Any plans for a branch-line leading off into the garden?

Some years ago Carl Arendt challenged a modeller to build a layout in an Ikea "Snackbox". It seems this was done "tongue in cheek" and that he didn't actually think much of the idea himself, but some modellers took up the challenge and a Yahoo group was established. The group never really took off, possibly because the Snackbox dimensions are in fact more constraining than they first appear. Nevertheless I liked the idea, and am having a go at building a pre-grouping goods depot in a Snackbox, as part of the "Farthing" series of small layouts: * This link brings up the entries related to my Snackbox layout ("The depot"): http://www.rmweb.co....age__tag__Depot * And this link is to some general reflections on the design concepts used: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/page/index.html/_/featured-content/the-farthing-layouts-design-principles-r27 In terms of inspiration for micro-layout shunting puzzles, here is a link to The Model Railways Shunting Puzzles site: http://www.wymann.in...ll-layouts.html And here is a link to an RMweb thread on exhibiting boxfile layouts: http://www.rmweb.co....post__p__311355

Looks fantastic from here, Will ! Apart from the bridge itself I really like the way the landscape has been moulded. It'll be interesting to see how you solve the shadow issue, it seems to be a problem that often comes up on here.

Hi Nick, those are interesting observations, and many thanks for the calculations. I checked the measurements of the C+L track and have posted some additional photos and figures in the main entry above. The C+L Flexitrack seems to be spot on for the 31,5 mm sleepers that you suggest would give the best proportional appearance of 9ft sleepers with 16,5 mm gauge. Looking at the Flexitrack from above, it certainly looks more "balanced" than the Timbertracks GWR panel for OO purposes... but then there is the issue of the Flexitrack chairs and keys which are wrong for the GWR. I think I'll try shortening the Timbertracks sleepers - although in that case I might as well have bought the timbers loose. Ah well... .

Hi Ian, no I didn't around to staining the sleepers yet, but will post some photos once it's done. I want to try leaving some sleepers soaked in the stain for different periods of time, to see what gives the best effect. The stable-block is tempting, but I'm trying to avoid any further distractions right now (here goes nothing ).

Agree very much that comparisons like this (and that nice "feel" of finescale track) brings up the question: why not go EM or even P4? In my own case I had better stay with OO for now though, as I am happy with it and also can't quite face converting my existing stock etc. I suppose it may seem like overkill to use Timbertracks for an OO gauge layout, especially since the emphasis is on an "impressionistic" approach. But I wanted to see whether finer scale track contributed enough to the "impression", and so far I think it does (although that narrow gauge look from the birds-eye-view has now lodged in my brain, maybe a different Timbertracks panel is worth considering...). On the wood stain issue, I was assuming that by staining rather than painting it, reduced adhesion would not be a problem? I seem to remember a thread about that on here, but haven't been able to find it. Very interested to hear about these other plans/experiences with C+L track. It seems to me that small/micro layouts are a good opportunity for testing things out as it doesn't require too much investment.

Jamie, in fairness I think the lighting in the top photo makes the narrow gauge effect look worse than it is. It's a bit better when looking at it in real life. In any case, I really like how it looks from the side, where I think it gives the right effect of the 9 ft sleepers. Lets hope it still does when it's all stuck down! Jon, I was thinking of a GWR stable block for the micro challenge - but I learnt last year that the pace of my modelling is too sedate for competitions! I'm fairly sure the stables will materialize at some stage though, just don't hold your breath.

A follow-up here to the track experiments in the previous entry. A batch of Peco Code 75 has arrived, enabling a comparison of the four types of track seen above. Everything is OO, ie 16.5 mm gauge. The Timber Tracks panel is the GWR 44' 6" version for P4/EM, and it's interesting to note theslight narrow gauge look this track has when viewed directly above. This isn't C+L's fault of course, but a result of the slightly incorrect gauge. But we don't often view layouts directly from above. As soon as even a slight sideways angle is introduced, the wider sleepers and spacing really starts coming into it's own, I think. The Timber Tracks panel has the later 8' 6" sleepers used after WW1, whereas the 1900s saw use of 9' sleepers on the GWR. But since the gauge is OO, I am hoping that the visual result is right. I have not actually cut the timbers from the panel yet, so the side supports have been edited out in these photos. C+L Flexitrack vs Peco Streamline. In both cases the rail is Code 75, but the different sleeper height makes quite a difference. Nevertheless, I've heard from other modellers that the two can be combined with no major problems. Unless anyone knows differently? The plan is for "The depot" to have C+L Timbertracks track on-scene, and Peco track off-scene. The height difference will in this case be accommodated by building the fiddle yard a tad lower than the scenic section. Just for good measure, here is Peco Code 100 vs Peco Code 75. I have happily used Code 100 on "The bay" as I had large quantities of it. With attention to weathering and blending in, I think it can be made to look reasonable from a distance (see eg this post), but it doesn't do well on closer scrutiny (see eg fourth picture in this post). I hadn't previously noticed that the chairs are different on Peco Code 100 and Code 75. Not sure what prototype the Code 75 chairs represent. Of the two, the generic Code 100 chairs look a bit more GWR'ish. For close-ups of the C+L chairs, see this post. Edit: The photos below compare the different sleeper lenghts (and sleeper spacing) of C+L and Peco track. See the dicussion on this issue in the comments below.

Hi Mark, and welcome to blog-land here on RMweb . Mid Chrome Green and Indian Red in P4 sounds very good indeed ! One of the things I like about RMweb is that people are interested in each other's work across chosen time periods and scales, so I'm sure many people on here would be very interested to hear more about your modelling. For my own part it's still OO, but experimenting with some finer scale track at the moment. Thanks for the reminder about Ian Rice's book. Once I get to building points it might be a good idea to get hold of it. So far it's all just straight track though: Things don't exactly progress fast in my modelling world. In fact, "The depot" was intended for the 2010 RMweb modelling challenge. Now there's a 2011 challenge, but I'm fairly sure it won't be finished in time for that deadline either .

Hi Chris. My fingers are itching to operate that loco and do a bit of shunting! Barnswell sounds just right to me

Sweet and simple, Chris. I know what you mean by the need for simplicity and "footloose" sometimes, it can be so relaxing. The hands-on (literally) operating principle of the turntable and point levers is interesting. Sometimes maybe we shouldn't be so afraid of the big hand from the sky, as it can actually add interest in some cases. How do you plan to make the levers operational?

Thanks for this, Dave. The idea of modelling some baulk road track is very appealing. I had originally considered doing it at some distant point in the future on a possible engine shed layout, inspired by some of the wonderfully evocative photos of the old engine sheds at Truro, Taunton etc just before they were replaced around 1900. In those photos, the baulk road plays an important part. But the future (like the past) is another country, and maybe it would be interesting to do it sooner, eg already on "The sidings" (next planned layout). The baulks could come from the BGS. It would be nice to have both types of track on one layout, eg a couple of sidings in standard track with another siding alongside still with baulks. Not sure if that would be prototypical though. I suppose in principle it would all have been replaced in one go, but on the other hand I seem to remember seeing photos of both types of track alongside each other, although they elude me at the moment.

Still following this with interest, Ian. Much relieved to see that I am not the only one to think in terms of "sticky up bits" etc! But then on second thoughts, I'm sure Brunel and Churchward secretely did that too sometimes: "Right, so underneath the boiler of this ground-breaking new design, I think we'll put some of those sticky out bits".

Hi Pugsley, as mentioned earlier I really like the variation you are doing here. Am very tempted to try out something similar with some open GWR wagons. Also very impressed with the weathering on that bogie tank already. Subtle is so hard to do, so am watching and learning. Those water mixable oils sound interesting.

Thanks, I will check in a local store that should have it. Yes, we do have plastic drain pipes .

Interested to hear that you use acrylics for painting the sleepers, gerrynick. I do something similar with the Peco track, but was not sure if it would work on the C+L plastic. Tom, yep the wooden sleepers really look good in the raw. Will try Carr's wood stain on them tomorrow. That minilayout sounds interesting, hope you're not abandoning Kingsbridge though! Pugsley/Nick, thanks for the tips re MEK - and for finding some on ebay! It does seem to be subject to postal restrictions though, but now I know what to look for.

Hi Jon, that's quite a coincidence. Just had another look at "Napier Lane", and the C+L flexitrack certainly looks good. If I didn't know what chairs they were it would be hard to say from that distance! Will be interesting to see it in S4. I did read somewhere recently about the advantages and disadvantages of inside/outside keyed track, but now I can't remember where (was it on here maybe?). On the issue of rail creep, Stephen Williams suggests that ad hoc maintenance could lead to an "almost random" pattern of keys on branches etc, while main routes followed the principles much more closely.

Hi Nick, I can see the case for both sides. I like the idea of being able to tweak things - but if the glued chairs can easily be lifted that of course changes matters. Looks like one of those things that can only be decided by trying it out. For the time being I'll try out glued chairs on the straight Timbertracks panels, and see how that goes. I'm not anywhere near getting into pointwork yet. The advantage of trying out handbuilt track on "The depot" is that I get a very manageable learning curve: The on-scene track-plan is just three lengths of straight track, of which two are virtually hidden behind the decks! I'll probably use Peco Code 75 for the fiddle yard, and save the pointwork fun for "The sidings" (next layout). I was planning on going with outside keyed track, so have corrected the panel and replaced some of the photos above accordingly. I am assuming outside keys would be appropriate for a medium-sized station (which Farthing is supposed to be) around 1907. But I had better re-check the books. Incidentally I just tested some stock on the inside keys before correcting them. Gibson-wheeled rolling stock seemed to manage without problems. Now to find some sort of replacement for/variety of Butanone, as UK suppliers are not allowed to ship it overseas and I don't think we have it by that name here.