Lacathedrale

One of my first railway book loves were "The Grand Experiment" by Hylton and "Fire and Steam" Christian Wolmar. Recently reading "Red for Danger" (and it's long chronology prior to the 20th century), and now Tess of D'urbervilles, Middlemarch and Great Expectations has further stoked the flames for the change of the mid 19th century and early railways in general. Where before I found Mike Sharman's layouts to be a bit twee and chocolate box, I now relish the early railway eccentricity. Recently there has been a layout set in the post NER-takeover of S&DR in Railway Modeller (whose name I've completely forgotten, sorry!) which leans towards this era. Ingleford Sidings elsewhere in RMweb also beats to this drum. Though obviously the rolling stock will date a layout, I'm struggling to define what makes a layout look like an early pre-grouping railway: ballast over the sleepers, wagon turntables, odd track layouts, the use of dirt and gravel and a lack of urban encroachment?

Thanks Eric, I did a double-check and they are all the correct way around, etc. - the only thing that comes to mind is maybe there's some adjustment leeway in the bolt holes for the traverser and I've got them at the wrong end of that adjustment. I've been laid low for the last week or so with a rather horrid cold, so work has been confined to my bureau in the livingroom. I did however manage to nab a Horsted Keynes signalbox model online for a fair price, so that just requires repainting to LBSCR colours and job done (for now!)

Well, and I speak from painful experience - is a layout of this size with (by your design) three crossovers, a slip, and five? turnouts really a sensible choice for a first railway? I built a model of Hepton Bridge/Wharf which was two turnouts and a crossover and it got my eye right in, even though I didn't take it any further than a basic scenic treatment - because like you, I had many false starts. I am still having false starts, mind you! :) I'm just saying that I spent over a year trying to model in 2FS without even getting a single train running and it completely sapped my enthusiasm and drove me to milder climes. I'm back now, but it was a long journey in confidence to get here and I'm still not there yet. Nevertheless, here's a rough approximation of your plan in Templot in an 8' x 2' baseboard: I've omitted the upper crossover and one of the goods yard roads. The upper road is shorter on the assumption there would be a station building top-right, but of course you could extend it if you wanted. The throat is arranged with a normal crossover leftmost, then a Y-turnout attached to a larger #. I think I got the calculation wrong hence the kink, but there will be a 'perfect' number which will allow the top track to remain straight throughout the formation.

I was thinking mainly independent of this thread - just out loud in response to Nick's mention of a laser cutter. Maybe more prudent than a 3D printer if rolling stock isn't a problem? Anyway.... Re: your point of a 6 coach train, why not make that one which requires special treatment, rather than worrying about a runaround? Signal bell codes for that kind of thing exist and it would add operational interest, rather than constrain it. Annoyingly, Parallels on my Mac requires a restart after update and I'm in the middle of a fair bit of work at the moment so I can't get to Templot. What is the rear runaround for? Of course you're welcome to it, but it doesn't seem like it's adding much particularly if it's hard up against the retaining wall you've illustrated. I would be inclined to omit it - and maybe remove the curve on the outermost goods track so it sticks out at an angle for a very short end loading dock track? Just some thoughts, feel free to ignore. Templot soon, sorry!

I personally found that soldering rail to PCB sleepers was far easier than Easitrac and FineTrax - infinite tweakability and far more robust at the cost of looking a little less realistic. There are obviously multiple levels: You can solder direct to the PCB strip, or use the versaline plates to raise the rail off the sleepers for a prototypical gap, or do what @justin1985 has been so successful with fully etched chairs, or a hybrid method with PCB and etched chairs/plates around the common crossing for the best of both worlds. re: @nick_bastable's advice about the crossover I can only agree - my biggest mistake was putting a turnout hard up against the baseboard edge, it gave me no end of trouble.

I would definitely replace the circled turnout with a single slip as you have described. I am a beginner also - I built three turnouts and a crossover and with that experience it was a piece of cake to build the single slip. It LOOKS more complicated than it really is, I promise you. Maybe you could make the goods yard sidings first, or the running lines and platform roads, and then make the decision? I built my single slip without any intention of integrated it into a layout, just as a 'can I do this' exercise - and I was surprised. With regard to Templot - I'm happy to help however I can, I think the throat might benefit from the running lines being at a standard 6' way instead of wider and that will mean a Wye or something akin. I'm happy to quickly sketch it up for you, but only if you're interested in making any changes - otherwise it's a bit of wasted time :) Let me know. @nick_bastable it seems that a laser cutter is pretty de rigeur for serious modellers these days - are you sending designs off or cutting them at home on a domestic appliance? I'm wondering how many slaters embossed sheets I'll need to do the equivalent of for a laser cutter to be financially worthwhile... Thanks, William

Tanith First and Only AND a mention of Dailuaine? Nice :) I've seen good work with a cameo cutter, I wonder if thick card might cut more straight than the styrene which looks a bit like it's been chewed up in the corners? Also, is the front of your model-as-a-model the perimeter of the layout? I only ask because it looks like you've got about 1/2" between the front track and the baseboard edge which seems like it might be optimistic? It might also affect your options for photographs of anything on the foreground (with the fascia in-frame) and lighting (where the light should really overhang the foremost siding? Other than that, I like the track plan - it seems to be a good compromise for a terminus layout that's pilot-assisted, and a little inglenook goods yard. If you were taking suggestions, I might also consider a separate headshunt for the goods yard off the platform runaround - that would make much more sense from a realism perspective IMO. Take care!

Tilt-Shift Photography makes real things look like a model by simulating a limited focal length that a model uses - I wonder if this one, being a night exposure with a vertical background of leaves which no doubt moved during the photo being taken, has done the same thing?

Getting there….

please ignore , I'm an idiot

Maybe 'worst' as 'most unneccesary replacement' ?

Trust the process. Trust the process! Heavy Charcoal underframe, and a mixture of white/sandy skintone/charcoal for the roof. The body sides, lacking Vallejo Pumpkin, are a mixture of Sunny Skintone and Fiery Orange to an approximate shade. It's got Vandyke Brown oil paint slathered over it now, but I'll wait for that to dry before any further shots!

An 1880 LCDR Luggage Van: The camera is being very cruel to me but I'm quite happy with it, honestly - straight and square, all of the bits worked as intended, etc. It is fitted with EM gauge wheels as per all my other Victorian stock and will be finished in varnished, unlined teak. I'm not really 100% sure on whether to keep the Victorian stock in EM - in theory I could re-wheel them for use on the Edwardian terminus layout and nobody would bat an eyelid, but I want to let it all shake out first...

This is the first time I've seen this layout and I'm in love with it - thank you for sharing your progress, I look forward to each as it progresses. I'm a huge fan of the muted and light palette you've utilised, it's distinctive and lends an airiness to the layout which (though aided by the relatively uncluttered spaciousness) is just delightful.

You'll want to ask @Mikkel about that. I painted a GWR Pannier with Vallejo but I'm not sure. I think either Game Colour Dark Green or Model Colour Black Green? It didn't offend my eye: I think as long as you're internally consistent it doesn't matter...

Indeed, this LOOKS wrong even though it's probably more TO scale than out of scale:

I use Vallejo acrylics exclusively and have used the retarder with their varnishes when spraying, but not used it at all while brush painting - I'm very curious :)

Sorry to call back to this - but is there a reason why you wouldn't just mix the retarder with the paint, rather than painting it on beforehand?

@Nigelcliffe I guess there really are a few ways to skin the cat. The least destructive would appear to be to hold the tread in a collet and machine down the flange and rear face only, accepting the increased over-face width. Failing that, pushing out the plastic bush (is there a known-good process to press it out - is it just a friction fit?) and mounting the old tyre on arbor for turning. Lastly, turning down the tyre as a bush to fit between the plastic and the society rim over the top. As a backstop, potentially drilling out a society wheel to fit the bush to. Is that about right?

Does anyone have any spare 10mm wheels Mk IV or Mk V that they'd be willing to swap for 9mm Mk.IV ones?

@Izzythank you for the tips - with the availability of spare wheels the pressure is off a little, but I think after conversation with @justin1985 I'll work on the flange depth/width as a primary concern and get things working before I worry about skimming the front. Can I please confirm what you mean about removing the plastic insulating bush? I've not done it yet, but planning to machine a collet to hold the tread of the tyre?

I did a quick search but couldn't see anything and that's a life-saver - I can practise without undue risk. I have ordered a deeply discount C-class, a set of spare drivers to practise on from Bachmann Spares, and a set of Maunsell-era Southern transfers from Fox - so I guess I'm committed at this point. Do you know if there was there a reason for re-tiring as apposed to turning the wheels down, out of curiosity?

Ah I'd not thought about replacing only the tyres - that's not a terrible idea assuming the gauge can be set properly afterwards?

Ah, ok - thank you Chris. Supplemental question: is Jun 1981 the most up to date guide on turning down drivers? I'm not quite at that stage yet but it would be good to know my options!

Now time has moved on a little, is there a known solution for converting the Farish C-class to 2mmFS? I have access to a lathe so in theory I could turn down the wheels but before I get myself in trouble...