Jason T

It's been a while since I did a scruffy sketch for the KL cause but hopefully the below explains what I mean

It doesn't need to rise much mate, even a couple of cm would give the impression of undulation and could carry over into the trackbed board to avoid any straight lines. As it stands, you could end up with a large flat area between the railway and the slope with no real reason why it would have been levelled off (if you see what I mean).

I suppose I am trying to say that you may want to avoid having the whole station seeming to be built on an embankment by bringing together the contours to the right hand side, even if only for a short length before dropping to below rail level again on another embankment. As an example, on the short section of motorway I am currently sat on in a queue, within half a mile of level motorway in relatively flat surroundings, the fields alongside go from 6' below road level to 6' above and then back to below. Even in the plains to the north east of Chester, nothing is level.

Looking very good Jeff. Will the embankment along the front transition into a cutting (e.g. Land above rail height) at it progresses to the right? It would add a different dimension to the railway being in the landscape. If so, my vote would be to begin the transition before the end of the straight section. You can ignore me if you wish...

Where is your sense of adventure? I seem to recall being pressurised into having The Mill ready to a tighter deadline than the competition it was destined for.....

I'll be back to one a week now I am back at work. The next one is a rebuild of a BR planked van that Chris gave me, already built. So far, I have removed the brakes (that were aligned for OO) and the brake levers as they didn't align with the pivots on the vees. As it was built a long time ago, removing them damaged the vees so they too have been removed and holes drilled to accept brass replacements. The brakes will have the moulded safety loops replaced with staples and will have the centres of the pivots drilled out so wire can be passed through them (a nerve wracking task that is done by first drilling through with a 0.35 bit and then opened out with an 0.5 one). Finally, the plastic buffers will be hacked off and replaced with Lanarkshire ones. It may not sound like much but if I have it done for this time next Sunday, I will be chuffed. I reckon I could have a modern Parkside kit with no deviation from the instructions done in a couple of hours (minus the painting) but where is the fun in building them as intended?

It's all looking very good mate. I see you have already placed the scenic spectacles in their usual position. Are they glued down yet as they may look better 7mm to the left.

Will it's debut be at the Land Of Goats show in July? I have a feeling that John will be pestering you to make a trip to Shipley in the not too distant future....

By way of an example, below is a Parkside BR Built ply sided van with a Red Panda clasp brake chassis. On Friday, I drilled out the original buffers and holes in the brake levers and vees to add a brass cross-rod for the vac cylinder and actuating linkages. Saturday, I built the body and chassis and added the buffers, coupling hooks and lead weight (inside the van). Today, I added a brace inside the body to keep it square, glued the roof on and added the rain strips from Microstrip. I finished by adding the vac pipes. Three days modelling, all in short 30 minute to 1 hour bursts and I have another van (albeit one of many needing painting).

Ooh, I do like that goods shed Paul.

I wouldn't go as far as master, but necessity does govern what and how I do my modelling. Most of my time recently has been spent on wagon kits, which are easy to break down into shorter tasks by prepping one day, body and rolling chassis the next, etc. as such, I always have something on the go so if I have a spare 30 minutes, I can dig out the kit and a few tools and keep myself occupied. As such, once painted, I now have around 60 EM gauge wagons with 'upgraded' brake gear, etc., as I am also converting Bacup's stock as well as new builds.

That's it mate, it really adds something even in it's raw form.

Yep, that's what I had in mind, like the below too. If the railway is at or close to ground level as it reaches the viaduct then unless it drops away again prior to the station, where would a road underbridge go and why? They would have put a level crossing in rather than dig a cutting for a road, especially on a line at did not see high levels of traffic. Also, the road is heading in the direction of the valley so I imagine it would pass under the railway and continue to fall towards or along the valley. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=settle+and+carlisle+viaducts&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=minv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjdz4HpiIPKAhUDLBoKHUv3DRgQ_AUICCgC#imgrc=rj8f6F6SGF32GM%3A The railway company would build the station and yard on as level ground as they could as the land needed is wider than that required for plain double track and would therefore require much more excavation to fit in the station, goods yard, etc. Additionally, embankments are cheaper and easier / quicker to build than viaducts so if the ground was low enough, an embankment would suffice (Ribblehead for example; the railway runs on an embankment before the viaduct starts). For the station, I reckon the viaduct ends of the platforms could finish on embankments too, meaning that you are looking up at them slightly. The underbridge could / should have wing walls that match the slope of the embankment, which will make a lovely feature on the layout. I know I have parped on abut it before, but I much prefer layouts where the railway is built around the landscape rather than the other way round. My own preference is to have at least one section where the trackbed is above ground level. Unless prototype dictated it (which it almost - but not quite - does with Sandside), I can't ever see myself starting with a totally flat baseboard. That's why I encouraged you to go with the trackbed on risers, it gives the opportunity to build a layout that represents reality far more than if you'd simply pinned sheets of ply to the frames.

A suggestion if I may mate. How about rounding the hill off below the trackbed and then build up an embankment parallel to the track, even if just for a short length running onto the viaduct.

Bloody Cobalts Happy Christmas mate, here's hoping Santa brings you some Tortoises (Torti?)

I don't get why you guys won't let me at your Black Fives, they really do look so much better once the smokebox and tender have been sorted out to make them actually look like a Black Five rather than Henry the bloody Green Engine. After giving one of mine the Brassmasters treatment, they all will be getting it. Merry Christmas folks

All good mate, tired out though. How are you guys?

Good choice Mark, I thought that facing point would annoy you enough to junk it eventually.

So, I have to ask, is the goods yard laid and working? Most important part if you ask me...

Did you sneeze on the lens?

Grind control to Major Tim?

I'll have a look when I get home; I have loads of different sized ones

I had a Class 37 once; a banger blue pre-TOPS Triang one (because TOPS didn't exist when it left the factory). I must also admit to a large logo 47 and HST when I was 13, swapped for a Black Five when I saw the light. And I cannot tell a lie (as Andy has seen my loco drawers), I still own a blue Class 25 (Bachmann one with the cabs chopped off in preparation for Hornby ones being grafted on), a blue 08 and until recently, a blue 03. No more 37's though...... I started chucking away wagon boxes and using packing crates a while ago now as keeping the boxes seemed pointless when I have hacked the couplings (and coupling pockets) off every RTR item I own, chopped stuff around and weathered everything - a collector's nightmare. For The Mill, the only RTR wagon likely to be used is a Bachmann Covhop with every other wagon (over 30 now) being kit built and therefore box less anyway. The combination of Really Useful boxes and Foamboard are ideal for storing stock, especially for transporting it to exhibitions and also being able to build in AJ'S coupling-friendly measures, as they are very sensitive to being knocked and twisted (but oh so lovely and discreet).

I would never say that Andy. In fact, you can never have too many wagons; a bit like Class 37's (apparently).

It really is a lovely model of an odd looking loco but if anything, it's oddness makes it all the nicer. Would they put much effort into cleaning a loco that spent it's final years atop a moor?