great northern

Blimey! Isn't this lot enough for you? Almost all coaches and goods stock are now in place, but lots of locos are still in their boxes, as no shelves have yet been built to accomodate them.

Not very close yet David, but it will show what a difference signals and detail will make in due course. Lousy photo - you will have to take my word for it that is Deltic in the distance.

I've recently acquired more photos from Andrew Ingram's invaluable collection, mainly to try to get more of the small detail that I regard as so important when trying to create a satisfying model. Here's a shot that has plenty of it, reproduced by kind permission of, and acknowledging Andrew's copyright. This is taken from the North end of the Up platform, and you will see that things were about to get very noisy for the next few minutes. All of the signals shown here will be arriving shortly, and will transform the layout when they are in place.The track's all there too, save for the Midland lines on the far left. I also get brilliant detail of the station lamps from this photo, and loads of general atmosphere.

Great news indeed Gordon - I'm delighted for you. No doubt you will soon be catching me up now

Alright, I confess, I'm a locoholic. There are about 70 more up there I think. No blue ones though Stuart. Lots more Pacifics, some B17's, a B12, a K2, some K3's, more WD's and 9F's, C12's, a few B1's, and a few more of various types. Might even get them running soon.

Oh, all right, just for David W - a different A3. A close up, including the ladder I had to ascend to find it. I didn't notice one of the lamps had fallen off until after I took the photo. While I was up there I also retrieved one of my favourite locos. This one was the last of the class, and fortunately for me worked out her final days from Peterborough Spital Bridge shed. Is that a handsome engine or what?

Yep - too idle to change it for something else.

More progress on Sunday - in fact the last spike on the main line was driven home, so as soon as we get the droppers and a few strategically placed point motors wired it will at last be possible to run a train round the whole layout. It looks like some of the buildings are not far off being ready, as are the signals, so things could be progressing very rapidly quite soon. I now have another dilemma. I can get all of the trains I want into the roads I want them to be in, and at the lengths I want them to be. However, there is then no space to store locos on trains. I'd rather like to do that, so now I have to decide whether to reduce every rake by one coach so that I can do it. It will need a lot of thought( and leave quite a lot of surplus stock). I won't post any more photos of the completed fiddle yard, as it looks remarkably like the last lot, but here's a shot of a line up on the Up side just waiting for the off.

The first good news is that Tom approved my latest attempt, so Sunday was spent getting it all put down permanently. Tom turns out to be very much like his father - if he sees an empty piece of baseboard he just has to fill it. His ideas are very good though, and will result in far more locos being permanently on the layout, rather than sitting on shelves beneath the boards. My back will certainly appreciate that. Anyway, here are a few shots to illustrate where we are now. This is the bit which originally was just going to provide one straight bit of track to allow locos to be railed by means of Peco loco lifts. It will still perform that function, but also now acts as the entrance to a number of spurs. These will all be purely for loco storage. The idea is that I look at my operating sequence before the session starts, and fill these spurs with locos in the order in which they are due to be used. Then they just come forward and reverse onto the train they are rostered to. Next one will become clearer as more photos are added. Basically there was quite a gap between the two approach curves to the Up and Down yards. Tom suggested that we could run two turnouts from Road 10, which is the Down through road, thus giving me yet more loco spurs. It can be done using Peco 5ft radius points, so I reckon it is well worth while, and will give no problems with reliability of running. Here's the final state of the entry to the Up side of the yard. For some reason it didn't quite go back down as it was when I tacked it, but the entry curves are now all of considerable radius, so again reliable running should be ensured. Next are the kick back sidings at this end. Again they come off a through road, so don't create any problems when I need to use them. The train you can see is the one that was originally going to be in one of those two alcove sidings. I reckon it is probably better placed now, and certainly it will be easy to get it too and from both the Up and Down side platforms, which is good, because this rake will see a lot of use. This one just gives more detail of the proposed access to the middle loco spurs. It hasn't been laid yet, as we have to lift one three way point to complete the wiring, so it will be finalised when that has been done. This is a close up of tthe rough position of those spurs. I reckon I'll get ten or more locos in there, so well worth while, given that I have all the track and points, and loads of Tortoises going spare at present. This is the (nearly) final layout of the Down side, and shows that I have still in the end been able to use that alcove! Fairly lousy photo of a rake of Thompson suburban stock. I'm not a great fan of his locos, if only because they are so hard to get round curves, but these I really do like. Here's a shot of the Artic twin set in its new storage siding. These are Gresley steel stock, and were used well into the '50's on Peterborough- Kings Cross locals, as well as the East Lincs line. Originally they had a custom built short composite in the middle, but post war many of the sets had a Mk1 composite substituted. Doesn't look quite right, does it? Finally for now, a close up of part of this rake. Really handsome coaches IMO.

I've lost count of the number of times I've laid this end of the fiddle yard, but I'm hoping this time I've got it right. There has been too much muddled thinking involved, particularly in pursuing the holy grail of 36 inch minimum radius. Why I became fixated with this I'm not at all sure, but it really was a bit ridiculous, for more than one reason. Let's start with the most obvious one. At the other end of the fiddle yard there are two approach curves of 33/34 inch radius. That end is all very firmly down now, and I won't contemplate taking it up again unless absolutely necessary, which means only if things fall off regularly when I start running over it. So, why try to insist on 36 inch at the other end? And it's only storage area anyway, so appearance isn't of primary importance, and the difference between 36 and 34 will make little or no difference to running quality. Next bit of muddled thinking is about that nice alcove into which I could get two more dead end sidings. We must try to fill every bit of available space, mustn't we? Why do I never learn? To be able to access those sidings from the up side of the station they have to come off the main entrance to the fiddle yard, as there isn't room for a crossover to get them onto the down side. The necessary turnouts then push everything further out, and the geometry gets difficult, unless you cheat, which I did albeit inadvertantly on my last attempt. So, I now ask myself whether those two sidings are really needed. Why didn't I do that weeks ago? Well, they aren't. The trains that I had planned to put there can easily be accomodated in kick back sidings which will run of storage road 1, which will be empty at all times to allow for continuous running when I feel like doing so. That means there's really no problem. Freed from these self imposed constraints, here's what my latest efforts look like. Now, I look at these and think how much better and more logical they look than the previous efforts, which can be found on earlier pages. Not only that, it is quite obvious that better and more reliable running will be achieved with this formation. And all this is achieved at the cost of approach curves 2 inches tighter. It's the art of compromise again, but it would have been much better,not to mention less frustrating and time consuming if I'd thought it through properly in the first place. So, unless Tom Wright turns up tomorrow and sucks his teeth and looks to the heavens, I think I've cracked it. There is a final irony. Those of you who have ploughed through all of this will recall my desire to run a proper sequence of trains, based on the 1958 WTT, and that locos will be rostered to prototypical diagrams. That means an awful lot of loco changing folks, which I'd intending doing by storing locos on shelves under baseboard and transferring them too and fro by use of Peco loco lifts. Well, if you look at that empty corner, you will see that I can still accomodate a number of dead end sidings there. They only come off the down main, and can't be directly accessed from the Up, but what I can do is to just put lines of locos in there, arranged in the order in which they will be required. If I do that before commencing a running session, it'll save a lot of messing about. Then the loco just comes forward to the Down main, and reverses onto it's train. Simples! Pity I didn't think of a similar arrangement at the other end........

Oh well, things can't always run so smoothly I had tacked down the last bit of fiddle yard. and all seemed to be OK. Unfortunately when I asked Tom Wright to check what I had done he pointed out that I had not quite set the first exit points from the custom built track correctly. I was only about half a degree out, but it created a cumulative error, so by the time we get round to the all important turnouts further on things don't quite do what they should. So, we either put up with a slight kink in the very first bit of entry/exit to the yard, or we think again.... I'm pretty sure what happened. I knew subconsciously that it was going to be a close run thing as to whether I could get in 18 roads without going below 3 ft radius,and I just manoeuvred things a bit so it would fit. Bad move, and it paid to get a second opinion. So, what next? Well, I don't want the risk of constant derailments every time something comes in or out of storage, so I think again. Maybe I'll have to accept a slightly tighter radius, so I'll print out some curves using Templot and see what I can do. Then I'll have to lay and wire the track to that radius and see if my Thompson pacifics will go round it. I've said it before, why couldn't the b***** man have put his cylinders in the right place? I will report on progress ( I hope) later. And the moral is. don't tighten that curve so you can get in that little bit extra......

Thanks Larry - I've always had grandiose ideas when it comes to layouts, and now at last I have the space to put one into practice. It's going really well so far, so I'm well pleased. As to the coaching stock, now I know what the official formations were I really do feel I should try to get it right, and anyway as you say it breaks up the monotony of wall to wall Mk1's. There's a few of yours in there I'm pleased to say, and Ian Willets Mike Radford and others have supplied some lovely stuff as well. I just wish I could turn out something comparable myself, but it would take twenty times as long as you do, and be about a twentieth as good.

Hi, Finally managed to talk to John Houlden. He says he just uses strips of lead where there is space within the boiler, and tries to keep the centre of gravity correct. I know Tony Wright did a much more complex job which was fearured in BRM a few years ago. That included removing bogie springs and other tweaks. Unfortunately TW is not contactable at present, so I can't check with him. It is also worth checking the loco to tender connection, as sometimes the tender is pushing the loco upwards, which does no good at all for traction. At one stage I swopped tenders between one loco which would haul no more than 5 coaches, and another which had no problem with 9. The result was an immediate reversal of haulage ability, so it's worth looking at that, and if necessary just bending the drawbar a bit. Or you can do what I now recollect TW did about that, which was to remove the Bachmann coupling arrangement altogether, and just manufacture a replacement hook and bar. Hope that helps.

Very nice indeed! I share your frustrations about getting decent photos, but from what I have seen so far this is yet another very high quality addition to the forum. Please keep us up to date with progress, and thanks for sharing it with us. I hate gradients, but I imagine it would be rather difficult to model the Waverley route without including some! John Houlden has added weight to some Bachmann A1's for me. I'll ask him for some details,and get back to you as soon as I can. Gilbert

Terrific progress yesterday. One of those rare days when everything goes as planned. As a result, the whole of the scenic side is now wired, and accessory decoders installed. :D Now all we have to do is pin down the last bit of fiddle yard permanently, add another few hundred droppers, and then install 27 point motors.Unfortunately some of those are going to be absolute pigs to do, as they are in very difficult places, but never mind, as we will start with some easy ones so that we have a complete circuit. Then I'll at last be able to see some trains go round.

Scope for launching a new internet business David? Compare the Bongo.com? :D

The trouble with Bachmann split chassis is that it's a total lottery as to what you get. I have one B1 that runs absolutely beautifully, three which are OK and another two which are and always have been poor. My V2's run OK, but sound like a bag of nails. I was beginning to worry that they were all getting to a mileage where I could expect serious chassis failures, and until recently there was no plan B, or not without considerable expense anyway. I'll wait to see what the Hornby B1 is like, and compare it with Bachmann with the new chassis. As to the V2, the more I look I feel that the modifications to boiler mountings Cartazzi and tender do make it into a fair representation of the real thing, to the extent at least that my scratch built one is not, and a PDK one will not be, ten times better. As either choice costs ten times as much, economic sense dictates that a bit of compromise is a good idea. Layouts as large as mine require both classes in large numbers, particularly V2's, as New England had more than 30 of them, so RTR becomes an essential part of my plans. In fact the more I think about it the whole thing would have been impossible to contemplate without the excellent Bachmann MK 1's, and A1, and the Hornby A3 and A4.......

Yeah, Ian's got a lot of that manual dexterity stuff David. Any idea where I might be able to get some? As to Bachmann, I think they have stated that they will concentrate on new models, rather than do new tooling for existing ones. Looking on the bright side, the new chassis on the V2 and B1 will at least give a decent running loco for a very reasonable price, and as you say, some of the defects can be remedied quite easily. I don't know how I have missed that loco to tender gap for so long. it will now be attended to PDQ.

Ian Rathbone sourced the parts David, so I'm afraid I don't know. Personally I think those boiler mountings plus the fixed Cartazzi improve the thing considerably. The "new" Bachmann offering as I understand it will have the fixed Cartazzi, plus a wholly new chassis, but no other upgrades. It will undoubtedly run much better, which is a big plus. Is the rest that bad? The thing I really noticed when I looked at those photos was the yawning loco to tender gap. That really does destroy any illusion of reality, and I don't know how I have put up with it until now. I wonder if they will improve that? The PDK kit available by the end of May? How could you David? Only this morning I assured my finacial adviser that there were no more expensive kit built locos on my wish list. Oh well, good resolutions fly out of the window yet again.

Here's a bit of idle messing about, but quite interesting. Three V2's:- One is standard Bachmann renumbered and weathered. Another is also Bachmann but with a new chimney and dome,a fixed Cartazzi truck and a Rathbone weathering job. The third is scratchbuilt and again Ian Rathbone did the painting. What do you reckon? Obviously the scratchbuilt one is better, but how much better than the "tweaked" Bachmann one? And what do you think is the biggest let down of the standard Bachmann product? I'll be interested to see if you agree with me. While I had the camera on the tripod, and knowing some of you like photos of ECML power, here's a line up in the fiddle yard. There are no lamps on the locos yet, for which I apologise. I know where they are, I put them somewhere safe......

I think putting the stock on is what starts to bring it to life Tom, and yes, it is all coming together now, very quickly really I'm hoping that we may be able to run trains all the way round within six weeks at the outside. The buildings will be coming on too, as will the signals, so things should continue to develop pretty well.

So did I, for many years. There aren't many benefits to getting older and reaching pension age, but this is one of them. Not having anyone around to ask awkward questions about petty details such as how much something cost helps too. B)

Stuart, If you want to come and operate it when it's up and running you will be more than welcome. Unfortunately it means a bit more than just popping round the corner though, doesn't it?

Coachmann would probably build that lot between lunch and tea!

Hi Simon, To get the length of trains I want means I can't store locos on some of the roads. The plan is that the locos will be on shelves, and when needed will be transferred by loco lift to dead end stubs at each end of the layout. From there they will reverse onto their trains. Well, that's the theory anyway. I have, surprise surprise, far more locos than trains, so there will be a loco change for every train after each duty. I've been trying to remember what the oldest item on the layout is. I'm not sure, but I know some things are 20+ years old. Just shows what you can build up over a long period of time. That's the only reason that there is so much on there now.