Lacathedrale

Simon, that may well have been my forum - it's a topic that I've been doing lots of research over (that is, the prototype station) but come to realise that in my desired scale/gauge/era combinations just totally impractical as a verbatim copy of the real world, so a Minories-alike will have to do As for duplicate routes, I'm not sure - in the S-scale plan there's an additional line at the bottom which isn't on the normal plan, while it may give that impression - in the N-scale/2mm plan, the routes are exactly as per the original, aren't they? I think the only S-curve which is added back in is from the up main into the platform adjacent where the train is depicted - but with as you said, acute (#8) turnouts maybe make this less of a problem. Aesthetically I like the use of the double slip, but in N it may be better to keep things slightly more straightforward?

I've read in many places that for uneven numbers are very effective at making something seem both natural and more numerous (vis-a-vis scenic components in a diorama) - I can definitely see that just comparing four and five-coach sets. In the below shot I've put together our notional rakes of NPCS, four and six wheelers and pre-group bogie coaches and all looks train-like in my opinion: This is in 1/64 rather than 1/76 or 1/152 so is a little unusual in terms of space-occupied. The only real functional change is the inclusion of an outer track for running around goods for shunting into the headshunt area. I probably wouldn't build this in to the first phase of construction, but oriented such that there is capacity to add it if desired at a later date. Beyond that, the only other amendment is a stylistic one, the use of a double slip rather than back to back regular turnouts - doens't really save any space but I like them. I guess the challenge of a layout like this in pre-group is that unless you're modelling in 4mm, there's just SO MUCH scratchbuilding! I guess both Buckingham and Maybank both just took that in their stride! I did make a version of Minories which fairly closely matches the pre-WW1 'greatest hits' from Holborn Viaduct, i.e. the Belle Sauvage yard, the street underneath and cab ramp, the wooden platform extension, the carriage dock, the signalbox on stilts over the met. extension as a view break and the loco shed and watertank. The 1874 plan had no runarounds, so very Minories-alike : I used the same cheat as last time by using a double-slip instead of a single slip, but rather than a goods headshunt, there's a threeway (here symmetrical, in reality probably asymmetrical) for a 2+2 platform arrangement.

I know we spoke about this before, but I've completely lost track of what page in the thread it was - for the minimum stock requirements for a steam-hauled minories? If I remember correctly the conversation broadly went that: 1) Suburban trains would most likely dominate in real life, but being similar in look and organiation could be represented by a couple of loco + coach sets 2) A posh 'chairman's' train 3) A couple of regional trains (cheap and fast, and a prestigious one) 4) (part of?) a named express with top link stock 5) A goods loco and some NPCS: newspaper vans, horseboxes, carriage trucks, etc. Is that about right?

ALL broken? Is this some H0-gauge hammer blow I'm not aware of? I do like a bit of Dampflok action, there (appears to be) such an irreveret "I'm playing trains" in european modelling which I find attractive.

@Pacific231G - some shots of Maybank I hadn't seen before, lovely stuff. Honestly, combined with my sojourn into tinplate it really feelsl ike the apex of terminus-to-FY operations, but that might be through the lense of rose tinted glasses!

Hello again DGF, I wonder if this my whet your appetite?

A bit further on: The body work is obeche - I was insure of whether to use it but felt like a more simple solution than buying thick styrene. Time will tell how it holds up. The washer plates are 10 thou x 80 thou strip. I've got some 40 thou square strip to make the square bolts, and 80 x 200 thou strip for the inside knees. I think I'll need some fine jewelry chain for the cotter pins on the sides. I'm not entirely sure aboutthe underframe - one option is to go with a commerical underframe from someone like Tenmille, or maybe fret something out myself.

3/8"/ft is still Imperial. S-scale was originally called H1 (as in, half-1 - like H0 is half-0). This is just plain old 1 Gauge.

Ah, well the old fashioned experiment has come to an end - thank you all for the fun and comraderie on the way, but I am just not getting the enjoyment out of stock that I was hoping!

@-missy- thank you for your help both via PM and here It seems that if I'm looking beyond 2mm then a 'benchtop' lathe rather than standalone is the best choice, but I hadn't factored in the need for a mill should I really want to get the fire going - which essentially doubles my outlay Opinions for 'one step up' seem to be fairly equally split between a 'Mini Lathe will do everything you need' vs 'Buy one up from a mini-lathe and you won't need to change in X years'. ArcEuroTrade don't do their 'fettling' service anymore, either @Jan W thank you for the link. I think one of my options is to check out the ER20 collet chuck from there, but I guess I need to figure out exactly what I'd be doing.

The 'City' section of the Paris Club train was four green four wheelers and a fourgon in 1893!

Well, I bought the only available M12 collet chuck available online and found it very wanting, and unfortunately I don't have access to a Myford to cut the thread or taper on my own collet chuck it is not wholly an issue of the collet however, also of capacity. I think if I could trade in the Unimat for an equivalent Sieg or Warco that had the same accuracy, but also the ability to machine larger work pieces, I would be happier.

I've got an Emco Unimat SL and I think I want to upgrade to a larger lathe for two reasons: The capacity is sufficient for most 2mm work, but insufficient for basically any other lathe work without major compromises The non-standard fittings make finding quality tools difficult. As a small example, 2. is causing me issues because I can't find any quality collet chucks at a non-extortionate price with the Unimat M12 fitting, so I can't then use the lathe for wheel machining/etc. for 1. ! My thoughts were to offer this up for sale to the association/etc. and put the funds towards a 'Mini Lathe' that can machine larger work (I've always wanted to have a go with live steam for example, but the SL is just too small for even the tiniest Stuart), as well as open up avenues for more commonly available work holders, etc. Before I go ahead though, I wanted to check that a mini-lathe isn't a false economy of quality - the machine will need to be at least capable of the finish and fine work as the Unimat! The last time this came up, it seemed that the Arc Euro Trade mini lathes (those with brushless motors, metal gears, etc.) were the best choice - The specific model I was considering was this: https://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Machines-Accessories/Lathes/SIEG-C3-SC2-SC3-Mini-Lathes/SIEG-SC2-SC3-HiTorque-Mini-Lathe-Belt-Drive-with-Brushless-Motor Any thoughts or opinions gladly taken. EDIT: If anyone has a source for a collet chuck for the Unimat then that might be a good shout, too!

First time I've seen Ronsthorpe, @fezza - looks nice! It does appear to break a few 'rules' but I guess that shows that they are really only guidelines.

Bradfield Gloucester Square does that really well - adjacent the double track mainline there is a single-track branch. In the era that John Elliott modelled it, he had truncated this with lifted track, and it formed a headshunt for the station. My understanding is that either running road could be used to back out in theory - with either a limit of shunt board on the inbound line that was the stopping-distance clear of the preceding box's block signal, or with an advanced starter and/or ground signals reaching away on the outbound line. I believe someone else mentioned in this thread however that if you allow a train to depart on the wrong line but which would notionally pass over a crossover 'off scene' it becomes very easy to 'cheat' moves. I personally found while modelling a suburban branch terminus that it was just awful to have a non-visible headshunt - it meant that every single move that involved shunting trains/etc. would require me to align an empty fiddle yard road - over and over again. I will definitely ensure that the next layout has either a) enough space for a 'backing out' move to be modelled beyond the throat, or b) a separate headhunt that is modelled infront of the fiddle-yard area. Maybe like @Ravenser 's masked-but-not-hidden fiddle area.

Some very interesting answers. Joining and splitting of EMUs happens at Purley, my local station - but it is a junction on the main line with a pair of branches, rather than a terminus. I guess one could extrapolate the need for longer and shorter rakes throughout the day by consisting and splitting multiple units, but I think as @Pacific231G has said - you'd still end up running that parcels train! Reading Iain Rice's old book 'Mainline in Modest Spaces' he suggests that the smallest 'express mainline service' (obviously with exceptions) would probably be the 'core' 5 coaches - two brake composites sandwiching a First, Restaurant, and Composite. These would be strengthened with greater or fewer numbers of first/second/luggage vehicles as required for longer/more patronised journeys. I have often wondered if we could summarise this in Train-Units or TUs - if we assume that a bogie coach in the grouping era is 57-70' long and locos (Stanier pacifics aside) are not longer than this, then we can consider that 1TU. We can also reasonably assert that the clearance on a 'model railway' turnout is about one TU. Therefore: An eight coach express is 9TU including the loco. A suburban service using a tank loco might only be 4.5TU. Space for a loco runaround (without having to set back coaches) is 2TU. If for Minories we talk about a mixture of these trains - two suburban services which look much the same as each other, one short posh train, one long fast train and one short parcels train - we can draw a number of conclusions: Our longest platform needs to be at least 9TU Our shorter platforms need to be at least 6.5TU (4.5TU for the train + 2TU for the runaround and headshunt) Our storage area needs to be 4.5+4.5+6+9+4.5 and one spare 9, containing a total linear space of 37.5TUs. We can even surmise that with a 'fan' type arrangement we'd need 3TUs(ish) for a scissors between up and down lines between the visible area and the fiddle yard proper, but since we have two long tracks (9TU) and the rest are shorter, the 1TU consumed by the turnout for each storage track doesn't affect us. If we needed all 9TU tracks, we'd need to factor in at least 11TU overall length to account for the turnout and clearances Minories itself has 5TU worth of pointwork from the throat to the platforms (there are two small return curves which for our intents and purposes fit into the 'turnout' category. Extrapolating this out, a minimum Minories footprint to support a 5 coach express would be: 6TU (platforms) + 5TU (throat) + 2TU (scissors) + 2TU (fFY siding fan) + 6TU (actual train storage) = 21TU, which in 4mm is approx 15', and in 2mm is 8'. If we subsitute the scissors and point fan we have a shade over 12' in 4mm and 6'6" in 2mm. This works with pre-grouping bogie coaches too, since tender locomotives were also smaller, but starts to break down when you look at 6w and 4w vehicles unless you increase the relative size of turnouts and locomotives.

Interesting idea - literally just being the signalman, for trains which drive themselves? Honestly I don't think it'd be that difficult - iTrain already has the functionality to set up things like train priority (i.e. train A takes a siding for train B), and with bidirectional DCC a computer/etc. would be able to identify which locos are on which sidings, set routes, etc. to feed a layout. Train looks at siding #1 and sees 'Duchess' i.e. express train, bell code to station operator for express and then pauses for acknowledgement. On acknowledgement and signals cleared, train is driven out onto a station platform as routed by signalman. The reverse would also be the case - bell code to next box 'are you ready to accept express train', set signals and off you are - the home of the FY box only being cleared when the relevant route is set/etc. I imagine the difficulty would be in when you want to drive the trains yourself

A bit more progress on the 4 SUB: I'm not sure I really enjoyed doing this all that much, really!

That could definitely help - but all of these things are applicable to steam working too so don't really form a differentiator. I guess however, it does ensure there's a base level of things going on - assuming one models the pre-signalbox-centralisation era! This is a bit interesting, reminds me of a videogame development 'challenge' where people are revealed new concepts to integrate into the game during development over the course of a day, i.e. 'time is running out', or 'inversion' or something, and their success is based on including or working around those limitations.

Lovely stuff @Ravenser - particularly your astute observation about platform widths. Blacklade has been on my radar since the 2006 (?) Challenge ! @Pacific231G - what intensity.

Cor, now that's not something you see very often! Your layout is a 'system' rather than a station, isn't it? I imagine that the problem of effectively having a shuttle service is less of an issue when you have a large junction and a continuous run around the room, rather than moving from the platforms directly into a traverser fiddleyard. Based on the scope of the above picture, I wonder if for a D/E station you simply need to look at it from a wider perspective i.e. train-level rather than wagon- or coach-level operations. i.e. to be presented with a requirement to run trains, and then have to satisfy them with the stock and capacity you have. I'm reminded of a game called RTC Kings Cross, where one plays the signaller for KX and has to route trains into and out of the platforms on a schedule, without delaying anything unduly. In some ways then, you could be playing a variant of Inglenook but with whole trains instead of single P.O. wagons.

Bastille was alot like the suburban platforms at Liverpool Street, and alot like how Freezer allegedly designed Minories - a 'jazz service' of immediate arrivals, only for a loco on shed to buffer up to the other end of the train and pull it straight out? So, as a 'theory' - what can be done to better support modern traction in a Minories layout, assuming that loco-hauled services are off the cards. Holborn Viaduct had a parcels service until the 70's so we can suppose for an urban setting that we might even see some air-braked vans - but that is almost the same as any steam-era station with a freight area (minus the brake van). My biggest question is 'how do we make EMU operation interesting, in the way that a steam-hauled service is by nature?' Is it even possible?

That last photo is just gorgeous, @Ian Smith - quite literally could be a period photograph!

Hotdog, raw onion and mustard is a great combo - but I can't get enough of fried onions. Planning on burgers tonight, hollowing out the inside of the top of the bun to ensure maximum onion-holding capacity.

What did engineering sidings look like in the pre-group era? Was it how we imagine them with bolster trucks, open wagons, ballast brakes, cranes, snowplows, etc. ?