Lacathedrale

I don't, should I?

EDIT: This project started as a 00-SF initially (pages 1-8), an abortive switch to 2mmFS (9-10) and is now back round again as EM (10+). Thanks to the kind help of the folk in my planning thread (and here), I cut the first sod today on my layout. It has been something of a winding road through scales and prototypes, always with a theme of a late 19th or early 20th century urban terminus where I can run trains of my favourite lines: principally either SECR or LBSCR. After some research (again, assisted greatly by RMWeb!) it seemed a simple massaging of the truth to fabricate a station as a kick-back off the Widened Lines: a mish-mash of Holborn Viaduct, Ludgate Hill, Blackfriars, Cannon Street. My broad theme is given the absolute hatred between Watkin of the SER and Forbes of the LCDR and their apparent desire to lock each other into a mutual death-struggle, it would not be out of character for one or both to build a station just to spite the other, or in the genteel manner of the L&BR/SER towards the L&GR, to 'bring them to terms'. As it happens the Joint Committee of the SE&CR now has made this station a little redundant, squashed as it is between the behemoths of the main lines. No doubt some damn fool plot in the Balkans will cause it to shutter for economic measures, never to reopen - but for now, it lives on in the heavy, dun air of the city. Fast services to Orpington, branch shuttles to Greenwich Park and Crystal Palace (HL) and Bromley by the SE&CR, as well as the ever more rare GNR and Midland passenger services from points north and occasional reversing LSWR service towards Wimbledon. Here is the track plan, the throat is based heavily on Buckingham (GC) And a 3D render of the same. The idea is that the FY can connect directly to the scenic boards for end-on operation for exhibiting, and the curved section slots in when the layout is set up at home. Not exactly the most practical of vans... Up main bottom left has access to platforms 1, 2 and 3 - the roads off the right of the assymetric three-way are a pilot pocket and a departures-only road. I'm mulling over hand-laying this throat, but a scissor diamond with an asymmetric three-way AND a double slip on opposite corners just feels like it might be a bridge too far. We'll see - but if I do hand lay it, it'll just be narrower version of the above. If I can find someone to comission to build an asymmetric three-way and short diamond, then I'd be a happy camper - I'd rather not use Streamline! I decided to use the Tim Horn laser cut baseboards, with holes cut in them to access the underside of the viaduct at strategic locations. I also have lengths of ply strip cut to the height of the viaduct surface, and these will be glued and tacked into both the risers, the surface and some additional alignment sections of 3/4" square stripwood. The viaduct itself will be bolted or screwed to the baseboard for removal in a real FUBAR emergency without destroying everything. The next step will be to put the TH board together properly, and make sure it all still lines up!

Thank you - it is a bit of a dilemma to figure out. Although I will end up recreating most of the left hand station board at platform (viaduct) level, I just don't think I can face the carpentry required to draft the lot out of open frame honeycomb. The Peco equivalent is as follows (purple showing cutouts, light green grid at 6" spacing, yellow bars representing the footings of the viaduct piece): I think I'll have to lay that middle crossing by hand, since the scissors is slightly curved - generally it's a little annoying that the Bullhead threeway, double slip and crossing are not yet available - I am considering taking a leaf from @MartinWynne and the excellent work on Eastwood Town, to attempt to hand lay the throat in 4-SF - I've always liked tracklaying and had a modicum of success in it in 2mmFS, so I feel that this should be doable too. If I am able to hand lay, this is what it would look like: There's really not much in it, is there? About 3" in length and very slightly wider spacing on the right hand exit! Either way I've already ordered the gauges from C&L, and have a decent amount of pointwork timbers/etc. so just waiting on delivery and I'll get a test turnout knocked up. I'm debating the relative merits of both approaches - I've had so, so many layouts which have never gotten past track-laying I'm wondering to myself if I just bite the bullet and buy a streamline code 75 assymmetric point and short crossing until the bullhead version becomes available!

Always had excellent service from Tim and found him to be communicative (within reason, as mentioned he's a one man band) and has always done me good turn.

Here's a render of the new arrangement, I think it works nicely. As @Satan's Goldfish good point - it might be better for the curve to be double-sided, maybe a slot for a backscene on either side? Something to think about (in future, not now - additionally whlie I'm fairly certain I could fit effectively three modular baseboards in the back seat of a car, I'm not sure I could fit a 4' x 3'6" corner piece!) I figure the station board would be fine to be build as-is with a viaduct plonked ontop since there's no pointwork - there will be a scissors, three-way, double slip and another turnout adjacent each other on the throat board viaduct. I guess large access holes cut into the surface of the TH board along with a removable viaduct would give the best of both worlds in that case? The only reason I want to be sure, is that I can start building the tim-horn boards right now, and I don't want to get it all together only to find that I should have been lopping bits out post-hoc I'm wondering if a large building like that shown at Ludgate below, might be a more effective scene-break than a rail overbridge: Unfortunately for better or worse I don't think there's much chance of a bridge on the station throat with all the pointwork!

Well in this case, the viaduct is what is carrying the track - that's what I meant!

Thank you all for your help and advice, the cutting of the sod is imminent. My only real remaining question is how to handle the viaduct - I'm using Tim Horn baseboards, so should I trace and cut out the track plan from the surface board and raise it up on vertical risers, or build it as designed and add a viaduct in afterwards? Kind regards,

I've ordered the 1965 annual as suggested earlier, I'll post the relevant information in this thread when it appears!

Thank you! Works fine Unfortunately the stayalive does not fit in that space, so I have placed it in the coal bunker.

Hello there, I've got a DCC Concepts Zen nano 8-pin decoder in my H-class and it runs a real treat. The decoder comes with a stayalive that can be fitted, and I think I might have found a great place for i: I just wanted to double, triple check - that I can remove that capacitor - it has a black lead going to it going thru a plastic/metal ring, and the other leg is soldered onto the top motor terminal,

Ah, very kind - I was sure I looked, but maybe not! I have sent an email to Olivia's Updated the title to reflect the secondary request, a whole separate set.

Hello all, I have managed to find both brake ends for a dark lake birdcage set, but I'm missing the middle coach - If you have a set of three birdcage coaches in dark lake, I could be convinced to take the lot off your hands, but really I'm mostly looking for that centre carriage to make up a set. All the very best,

I can only find reference to a book with the subtitle 'A Cross-London Journey, 1906' by Ian Allen ? Seems to be a bit of a ghost though!

Interesting, David - I'd not thought of pairing FY tracks to get a much closer spacing at the neck of the traverser. Also, I guess one benefit of OO over EM/S/O-MF is that I can use setrack and not have to worry about kinks in the areas where clearances are already going to be tight! So, this has gone from a straight yard with 41" clearance for 39.5" FY tracks, to a hockey stick traverser (though the suggestions of pulleys, winches, revolvers, etc. are really interesting to read I'm just not that confident I could pull it off). The other, 'final' choice is to move the layout from my study (with the wall and window arrangement previously discussed), into my spare bedroom. This room has alot more space for a curved FY, it would look something like this: Though this seems to be monstrously out of proportion, it actually meets a bunch of short and long term goals: While at home, I don't have to mess around with cassettes, a traverser or anti-gravity device. There is no connection from the up to down lines off-scene, but that long, large radius curve would be excellent fodder for a hand laid scissors and a second cameo - and If it becomes mandatory before I get around to building one by hand, I'm sure I could add a short crossover between the yards. I can connect A-A together directly if I ever exhibit the layout, for a traditional linear arrangement. The FY and scenic boards should stack nicely (since the FY can be the standard folding design - another Minories callback, ha!). This is why it's important that the Home Curve doesn't contain any FY-relevant pointwork - though I guess it could contain pointwork that's only used by the FY - for example a Cannon Street style MPD, or an optional headshunt or carriage road (as per @t-b-g's suggestion). If the space to host the layout in this arrangement becomes unavailable in future, I can still fabricate the FY/traverser/cassette arrangements discussed in this thread (which is why I haven't adjusted the length of the scenic boards even though there's more space available). The cost and complexity of a couple of ply boxes with four turnouts is SIGNIFICANTLY less than any of the compact arrangements. I'm aware that the FY track arrangement would be more efficient if staggered rather than in-line, but it would make A-A alignment impossible, or reduce the capacity by a line (i.e. both up and down would share a single FY track in the middle). As you can see, my current longest train fits easily into the shortest track. I can also fit a Bulleid Pacific and four Mk1's - depicted in pink - in the longer tracks, so I think that fairly sorts me! I've also lengthened the platform roads as per @Nearholmer's suggestion and I've fiddled with the platform ends and all trains (for which the layout is currently designed) fit in beyond the notional platform starters with a little room to spare. I can imagine a bolt-on section to the right hand side of this which would extend the tracks under an overall roof/etc. as per the original minories if I ended up being overly concerned with train length in future. Though this is a divergence, I think it is wholly in the spirit of the discussion so would gladly take comment or criticism.

I've often wondered what that side of Farringon Looked like, with all the buildings/gantries over it. Two questions: - did that headshunt/etc. ever do anything? It's always caught my eye as I go past on the Thameslink. What is the hole on the right hand side?

gosh, such wonderful discussion - I barely know where to start. Train length / operational flex / Tonbridge Express @Nearholmer @t-b-g - It is an interesting choice to consider my 4-4-0 hauled bogie stock separate, particularly with the separate marshalling of carriages - but it doesn't really change the fact that they need to live somewhere in my FY - so the minimum space requirement doesn't change, right? I have cancelled one of my 6w coach preorders to bring the ultra longest train (six 6w + 4-4-0) down to the same size as my birdcages + 4-4-0 - so in theory any train can pull any coach formation. Station design: @Nearholmer My track is most definitely going to be situated on a viaduct, so I'm not sure that a mezzanine with the track right up against the left-hand board edge wouldn't work. I haven't got too far along about how I'd like the station building to look, really. In my mind, this route is the result of a spat between the SER/LCDR in the same way the Bricklayer's Arms ended up being a passenger terminal to spite the L&GR - so it doesn't need to be massive and ostentatious. Maybe just a footbridge to track level (Spa Road, Bermondsey - queueing on the track was pretty endemic, apparently) Maybe more seriously, the left hand corner of the layout looking something like this (if you imagine that wrought iron roof in the background is the end of the trainshed) The front of the viaduct on which the station is setting might look like this, maybe hiding the end of the tracks under the overall roof just like LB (well, the south/left side of it!!) I'm not clear on the benefit of making the platform tracks longer - they are already long enough to take the longest train my FY can support? Fiddle Yard design / Operational flexibility: @t-b-g I could certainly have wrong-line-running into a small subsidiary carriage siding (i.e. the stabling sidings on the east side of the approach at Victoria), the other side of the lines to the main carriage shed. I think it would be a bit difficult to have discipline were it not for the fact that this only ever needs to happen for ONE train per operating session and only affects ONE FY track - so I can't 'cheat' in an operating session. @Ron Ron Ron - now you're just being silly Cassette usage As it pertains to cassettes, I can imagine a set of cassettes which are aligned via pegs/dowels/runners into a traverser bed - this way, I can build the cassettes first without having to 'worry' about the traverser and get some idea of traffic patterns (idea courtesy of @justin1985 ) - and should the need arise make changes - and then build a cassette-verser at a later date. I would build separate cassettes for the locos and the stock - this works nicely because it means that 'restaging' just means lifting and placing the loco cassette infront of the stock cassette. I imagine the cassette supports on the FY baseboard would be simple blocks of wood every 6-8" or so bolted to the board underneath, with a smooth ply surface ontop with a felt covering - the cassettes themselves would need to locate quickly and without much clearance - particularly at the junction with the scenic boards - any ideas? I thought about jig-aligned end-on drilled holes in the ply base, one of which has a double-ended peg inserted. The advantage of cassettes is that I can overhang them slightly into a socket a few inches inside the edge of the scenic board, rather than having to terminate them inside the FY board - probably a small thing, but one less joint and alignment to worry about in the short term.

@Nearholmer I'm taking advantage of the glut of SECR stock available RTR, so these are the bogie birdcage stock - not strictly in period but honestly I just want to play trains for now and not get so stuck up in the minutiae!! @Titanius Anglesmith I'm glad you like it, this is actually courtesy of @t-b-g 's kind help in showing the throat of Buckingham GC - much simplified of course, the original has a goods line aisle-side infront of the station throat. It's considerably more compact than Minories and generally avoids those reverse curves.

Good point @woodenhead, I imagine if I were exhibiting I'd be on the outside of the L if it were this original/default setup, but I've never exhibited so if it went badly - I can forget about it, and if it went well - then I can build a straight FY for 'exhibition use only'

@idd15 - not a bad idea for the bottom traverser track, for sure. @Nearholmer - the maximum train length is dictated by six 6-wheeled coaches, or three 60' coaches plus a tender loco - here's an overall shot of the layout with some notional scenics in place (as per our discussing on Pre-Grouping over the Thames - this is a SECR station based in the Blackfriars/London Bridge/Charing Cross/Cannon Street quadrangle, off the Widened Lines), and the trains in staging - as you can see, pretty tight! Top to bottom, a surburban tank on some 60' stock, a tender loco on the same, a suburban tank on some six wheeled stock, and a terrier on some urban four/six wheelers. There's no way I'm going to give up running the new Wainwright D when it finally gets released, or a nice long rake of four and six wheelers - so train lengths don't all have to be this long, but the FY needs to be able to support those lengths (red vertical line). I've already got the scenic Tim Horn baseboards (black vertical line), so can't really make the visible layout smaller either. I could, however - go hog wild and build a proper fiddle yard. I would need to mount the layer lower down (i.e. sitting on my office chair) which is probably better anyway, in order to not obscure the window - but assuming the FY was frameless (i.e. just a nice varnished wood surface trimmed/etc.) it wouldn't look too bad: This would allow me to not have to think about traversers and timber mechanisms. It would also mean that should I wish to exhibit I could do it with this FY but if it became a more common thing, I could build a separate/additional 'straight' FY/traverser at a later date.

Yes, the lowest road is 'entrance-only' - but that is a sacrifice I'll have to make if I were to use a traverser - it gives me four trains in and three trains out without restaging. Each train, without interference such as remarshalling rakes or adding/removing vans takes about 7 or 8 minutes on XtrkCAD - so that's 40 mins of operation, after which it would require restaging. Cassettes is an interesting choice, though, and something I'd not considered. Assuming a skeletal support structure (instead of a ginormous box) - they can run straight from the exit of the scenic section up to the maximum extent - since they're not permanent and don't require perpendicular movement they would take up very little space. And of course, they can be shorter for my shorter trains. I guess (!) the problem is that the exit track of the layout is the headshunt for basically all movements, so would always require an empty cassette there. A traverser would be a gentle pull to align the tracks while operating, whereas a cassette would neccesitate 'restaging' for every train by getting up, physically moving the cassette to a shelf and getting a new one down.

I've got 41" to fit in a four roads in my FY, where the tracks tracks need to be 39 1/2" each. Tracks will enter the FY board perfectly perpendicular to the board edge. The end of the traverser or sector plate will have a thin layer of perspex bolted onto it to stop trains running off the edge (or into the wall in my case). There is no room behind the layout (it will be mounted on a wall), although I suppose if I ever exhibited it that would be less of a factor (and probably deserve a 'proper' FY board instead of this!) This is roughly what the scenic board will look like, in green - with a Tim horn baseboard I'm using as a base for the traverser/FY footprint marked out in purple: Here's another angle showing the size of the traverser in its rearmost position: As you can see, with my longest train in-situ there's not much room to work with! I had thought of mounting the purple board flat to the exit from the scenic boards, but this way I've got lots of space for mechanical gubbins on the purple board to move the red unit around. Any suggestions gladly taken on this! I'm not sure of the math to work out what the throw of a sector plate would be vs track spacing (which for my layout will be about 3" as it exits the scenic section), a plan of the exit to the FY and some flat tracks (which are the correct length) is included below: It is actually possible for me to squeeze a tiny bit of extra length out of the space I have, by jinking around a brick column in the corner, as shown below - so if neccesary I could increase the distance from the end of the FY board to the start of the traverser by around six inches, with the same train length (see the red mark). However, this will start to encroach upon the window the end of the FY - all the time, instead of only partly and when the traverser is extended: I would greatly appreciate any advice or help, in fitting a traverser board with just an inch or so of room before the rails actually get onto the traverser! Many thanks,

Looking really nice. I wonder if it might be effective to cut off the bottom few inches of the backscene to bring the horizon lower down, to make the layout seem wider and more expansive?

So a Met train running on what is now the Hammersmith & City line and to Whitechapel and around St. Mary's curve onto the ELR? Interesting that St. Pauls had terminating LSWR suburban trains?!

Wonderful diagram - does this only cover terminating stops? I assume Farringdon is in there just for easy placement, since it doesn't appear that anything terminates there - but you haven't included Blackfriar's/Ludgate Hill. I can immediately see how this would end up a behemoth of a diagram if you started to include the other services that hang off those shared routes! It does provide a rich tapestry to model something too, so thank you.

So I've been reading 'Subterranean Railway' by C. Wolmar and the early history of the Met and District is fascinating with regard to the antipathy by their respective chairs (also the chairs of the LCDR and SER) - such as one company chaining a loco to a disputed siding, and the other trying to haul it out with their own locos. It reminds me of that quote about Bricklayer's Arms, paraphrased 'The only reason this terminus was built by the LBR and SER, was to force the London & Greenwich to accept favourable terms for their use of London Bridge' - the sheer amount of petty rivalry and brinkmanship makes me smile. With that in mind I'm considering moving the layout that prompted this discussion from Croydon way up into the armpit of London - somewhere in the triangle of Cannon Street, Holborn Viaduct and Charing Cross. It's my understanding that for this area the City Widened Lines as the only realistic source of 'northern' traffic - so that means the GNR and MR. The stimulating discussion of coal drops and goods yards aside, did these railways run passenger services headed by their own locos, into southern suburban termini? The wiki page for the Widened Lines suggests it was travelled by Metropolitan locomotives - which would make sense given Watkin's joint chairmanship of the Met and SER - but no further details on what these locos hauled. I realise that the Great Northern or Midland running trains from their vast stations across London to terminate in a secondary terminus on the river feels a bit of a stretch - but Rule No. 1 and all that