richbrummitt

I really must get the photos of mansfield from my dad, I really don't get much time to do anything

I know that one. Fortunately the subscription costs nothing! I'll reply to your pm separately.

I grew up on TTTE, Jimbo and the Jet Set &c. in the 80s and just stumbled upon this blog today. I was dissapointed to not see Thomas and friends (I should have grown up by now?) on the layout in earlier posts, but then I am rewarded for my perseverance with.

I presumed it would be OO, as there is so very little for you in N out of the box. I think I have one of everything motive power and rolling stock wise that Tomix make and they occasionally make a Sunday afternoon appearance on other peoples layouts, but there are only really four trains.

The coaches are intended for Henry. If you'd have thought more quickly you might have explained that James could not manage his train today because he is not very well, so Henry has to pull it instead.

I love the effort you are putting in. I have an extract from the Japanese catalogue from a few years back that shows a Gordon model as coming soon, but various suppliers and importers tell me that it has never become available. If you are interested there is an etched kit in 2mm for a tram like the one Toby is based on.

You're most welcome. I may call that one in soon. I'll let you know if I need it (Don't worry it'll only be ability time and feedback that is required).

The problem is always the space available between the frames. Microantribe (sp) have some small gearboxes to fit small motors but the ones that I thought looked useful are unlikely to fit between the frames of a 2FS loco. Making the gearbox frames integral to the locomotive frames reduces the space issue, but brings with it a whole heap of grief in planning the chassis design for a loco.

Glad to hear this was much more successful than your last outing. Does this mean that once the point rodding is finished you'll be ballasting the track for the final time?

The 'FPL' is quite useful, it hides the bit that operates the point really well too. Im not sure if every point on Highclere should have one but I have fitted one to every point.

Probably only the ones on the main line. If you want to make sure on the size the dimensions are in the GWSG book on switch and crossing practice. Let me know if you want them.

As for the stools, you really cannot see them at normal viewing distance but I think in hindsight it is worth adding something to represent point rodding, even if its 'blobs' of solder.

I believe you on this one. I looked up how big a stool is. A fraction over 1mm tall and 0.5mm long at this scale. I feel that this is my main failing as a modeller: getting too caught up int the detail to be productive.

This looks as if it has the potential to be a really interesting layout. Awaiting further progress

There's a photo in the Adrian Vaughan book. I saw it yesterday when flicking through for pictures of something else that I didn't see. It jumped out from having seen your model.

Actually, technically speaking she is the one who brought it up.

Technically speaking no I wasnt! It was Rich

Agreed. I am guilty.

unless of course someone is offering to draw, etch, and send me some really quickly, any offers?

How quickly? It's the next thing I need to do on Littlemore. I don't mind being distracted again.

I can't believe that people are commenting that the stools you have used are the wrong type

Sorry. I'll get my coat.

I remember going to a talk by Steve Hall (P4 modeller) where he demonstrated the working point rodding on his 'Halifax King Cross' layout - fantastic, but probably not a realistic option in 2mm scale!

Now that is cool.

Hi Rich

 

The ones you were going to send me by any chance?

 

Seriously though is anyone really going to be that pedantic when they can hardly see the things!?!

 

I could say that as the line was served by the SR, as well as the GW and the station is on the southern section of the line...

 

M.

Yes, maybe (that's why I was going to give mine) and no.

Hi Missy,

 

Please forgive me for asking this, but is there a special reason why you want to use square wire?

 

From the info that I have, GW point rodding was round (see for instance: http://www.wsr.org.uk/bajune2003.htm) which means you could make it to scale.

 

David

I was sure it was both, with a change from round to square. I don't remember the date.

They are LSWR stools (I'm not guessing from the photo, I have some that I will never build). You should have convinced Ivan to do the GWR ones, since he has both in his range.

I think this location is a good one. There is enough operational interest with the sidings, and a managable amount of stuff to do without getting disheartened. A natural scenic break at one end is a bonus!

I'd imagine that the central building is the lock up goods shed, especially given the kind of doors it has and a lack of platform facing windows. I'm sure this wasn't uncommon. After all there would be a limited amount of space in the offices of such a small station building!

Another point is about your loop. Was the station a passing station? If not it is likely that it was a siding with a connection at each end. This would have allowed either an up or down train to pick up and drop off wagons, again, not uncommon.

Nice. I am thinking of something similar for my passenger luggage van, a K3 as its unavailable.

That might not be quite true. Let me have a look in my boxes and see what I have. I remember buying a bunch of 40' PLV etches from a couple of sources. I can't remember how different a K3 is from some of the other diagrams of the same period.

Me too. I can't understand Chris' patience.

This, for me, is much more interesting. I've thought about making mine a roundy now I have a bigger car. I'd lose the engine shed though.

I liked the previous plan better: To me it looks odd with the loop continuing through a goods yard that is split in half.

Just use rod. Flatten the top a little once soldered up. There was some narrow gauge on show at the 2mm Expo last year with track done like this and you had to look hard and close to spot it.

Thanks Mikkel,

You really brightened my day. The video was great in concept. Many of the shots, expescially the stills are too short in my opinion. I think the same amount of content in 170%-200% of the length would have meant that more could be taken in. I felt sometimes like the images were flashing in front of me rather than me being able to look at them. If I could have played it more slowly, maybe -1.4x, I would have done.

You might need some chairplates to match the height of the copperclad sleepering to the Easitrac?

I very nearly bought a T gauge set yesterday.

In my head I was thinking

'it won't take long, it's tiny: it can't take long'

Deep inside though I knew that it would.

Back on topic though: I would make the checkrail below rail height so that when you clean the rail you don't shine the check rail. You'll probably use chairplates to match the height of the existing easitrac (?) so just solder the check rail directly to the copperclad. You shouldn't really be able to realise the height difference when viewing because of the gap for the wheel.

I have copies of all the books mentioned thus far. My A,B,H&T are separate volumes. I believe they are first re-prints, ie. second edition.

Which book is that? I don't recognise it. I know there is one book on GWR wagons that I do not have on my shelf I was told by a railway bookseller. He described it as 'difficult to get hold of and quite pricey'.