Lacathedrale

Hello there! As per my previous thread I'm investigating options to build the following formation - I believe I've got the check and wing rails set up correctly - there are a few where the extents of the track crop it (for ex, top wingrail of bottom-right turnout) and some where it was just easier to extend (such as the joins around the vee's of the diamond), and one where I'm not really all that sure (the tiny wing rail just above the label for turnout CR033)- but I'm sure I can figure these out. Bottom left is a slip which has equalised timbers - not sure if that's a thing in this formation? I'm really just a bit flummoxed about how I go about timbering the area around the diamond - what is the process I should use to include, omit and shove? Presumably I keep those under the crossings exactly where they are? Would anyone be willing to rectify on my behalf in exchange for a donation to the Railway Children charity? It's no problem to supply the template files.

Thanks @jim.snowdon - so when you say 'crossing', you mean the common crossing assemblies of the turnouts, and the middle of the diamond?

Thanks @Flying Pig - the three way is listed for sale on the usual e-retailers so I assumed it was also coming, cheers!

Hi chaps, I was wondering if there was any news that I've missed about these? I remember calling up Peco some time ago to ask about their release and they were 'just about ready' about 9 months ago - but I've not seen hide nor hair of them since. Is there some known issue/delay/problem with them? None of the usual retailers even have a release date! Cheers,

I've had a station throat plan knocking around my head for a little while, but I'm quite terrified about how I would wire it up - does anyone have any thoughts on where to set up insulating gaps and switched frogs?

Here's the pointwork whipped up quickly in Templot - this time in 4mm / OO-SF. B6 pointwork except the loco/departure route of the threeway, which is a 1:5 irregular turnout. Not too shabby to fit into a shade over two feet!

Thanks @Regularity - this looks to be the prototype so I assume it's LMS rather than MR then?

Next step in my Gibson MR Van quandary is to figure out the strapping. The model as it stands is here: Parkside do a model of this van, it seems, and here is a picture which shows the detail in-situ that I need to add: The etch of strapping is here, I've annotated what I think corresponds to what, but I would be very grateful for any corrections! And yes, I have just noticed that I put the strip to represent the bottom of the solebar in the wrong place on my model, I'll have to fix that

Those look wonderfully clean! Here's my latest progress: I'm a little stumped on the brake v-hangers - they had a dog-leg bend, but which was the wrong size to fit under the edge of the solebar. In any even I soldered them in behind and will add some strapping on the front.

Not super exciting, but the solebars are now on to the van - a little tricky with four layers of brass that all need to be aligned well across the full length, but I think it's come out nicely:

Gibson MR van started: https://i.imgur.com/JCQNEuT.jpg Seems like a pretty elegant compensation solution, using bend down tabs which fit into the rockers.

I think this is really the only way forward - I don't want to sacrifice the location too much - one of the charms of the layout plan and location chosen was its proximity. That said, I'm somewhat heartened by pictures of Vivian Thompson's Eastbourne in this link, which show some pretty non concurrent stock, colour schemes, etc. and still comes out as authentic: Maybe I just need to consider myself anchored at a certain time (say, midway through the first decade of the 20th century) and then lean forward or back depending on when the mood strikes!

I've got the brass in my workshop, but will have to send an order out to Eileens for a sheet of NS - other than being a bit easier to work with, is there another reason?

Many thanks Jim - Richard actually provided me with the test shot of the Terrier etch and some castings, so I'm in good stead. I've got a photocopy of the chassis etch, but no actual brass - so I'm going to be building that myself. Is there a rule of thumb as to material thickness? My gut feeling would be to go with 40 thou, but I wonder if there might be an advantage to go thicker. I'm planning on using remote control rather than powering through the rails, so gapping/etc. is not a factor. @steverabone - as hard as it may be to believe, those LNWR 0-8-0's actually ended up being routed all the way south to Norwood yard - just a mile or so away from where I'm siting my potential layout in suburban Croydon! It was quite the shock to read that!

I've finished the Southern Suburban Steam book - pretty fascinating. It is much like has been discussed in this thread - D-classes were booted off suburban traffic by the AC electrification and Terriers were shunted off to various lightly-laid branches at the same time - so if one wanted to practically include them in a layout it would need to be pre-war. Now I know, it's going to make it very hard for me to justify a 1930's layout without some extreme reaching - (as above, alternate london terminus that has the magic wand of 'political grandee' to force steam into it! Thank you all very much for your kind and considerate help in researching ! .

@Nick Holliday that's not a bad idea - who wouldn't have liked to have alighted at at terminus in such gorgeous surrounds? There are some pretty nice pictures here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricklayers_Arms_railway_station and describes quite adroitly the internecine conflict - built in a ridicolous location almost exclusively to force the hand of the London & Greenwich to permit the SER and LCR to use London Bridge. The intriguiing snippet 'The railway introduced a proposal to extend the line to Waterloo Road in 1846, which was rejected by a committee of Parliament.' gives a little more credence to my idea about a parallel push to a Westminster terminus and has the same ring as 'Kings Cross (York Road)' . Maybe this terminus was built, as an LB&SCR station alongside Waterloo. Trains from the west country into the city could be routed onto Brighton rails near Epsom, avoiding the congestion around Clapham Junction, Longhedge and the Spa Road junctions, and at the same time act as an additional terminus of the South London loop line, for those charming ex-AC EMUs on suburban traffic.

So if I am reading correctly (and I have both the Southern Suburban Steam book and Southern Electric books ordered and for delivery imminently, thank you @Nick Holliday - so no doubt subject to correction) - siting the layout on the south western division (i.e. an overflow for Waterloo, a Charing Cross-style push across the river by LSWR, etc.) would allow me to more easily justify mainline steam locos. I do appreciate that: This notional station would be incredibly unlikely by 1930 (although quite in keeping with the spiteful competition between the pre-grouping companies south of the river) Those loco-hauled services would be 8-12 coach trains rather than the three or four coach trains I'd be modelling Suburban services would be EMUs apart from maybe extending the Kenny Belle from Clapham up to this extra terminus. ??

Julia, I have so many questions! How did you transfer the print to brass? Using the standard resin rather than brass, do you think this process would be suitable for larger scales, or would it be too fragile?

Gotcha, so it's going to be multiple units anywhere in suburbia past 1932, and if there were any steam hauled services they would be a) using pre-group bogie stock and b) routes to non-electrified branches. With multiple units I'm fairly comfortable with the idea that 2-Wim, 2SL would have run around the area (at least, within a mile or so of my fictional-for-that-century terminus) and I gather the ex-LSWR EMU's for the purpose would be the notional 3SUBs? It is a little moot however, because the point of bringing the layout forward 40 years was to enjoy malachite and green locos, rather than a layout full of multiple units

Looking good, Julia! Are those 3D printed centres?

Excellent, I've just sent a note to the s-scale list on groups.io to that effect - it can't hurt to ask around!

@ScottW that is a very kind recommendation, thank you - I'm prepared that some of these components I'll have to fabricate myself but getting a figurative leg up can't hurt. At the moment my goal is to model somewhere around Croydon, and at the moment I'm tossing up the options of the era: pre-group attracts, but so does that malachite green! I figure the E1 would do decent enough service in either layout.

I replaced the pivot rod with some larger 40 thou dia brass and it's much more solid, the waddling much reduced. I have decided that it is time to move on and glean learnings from experimentation rather than through the power of thought, so laid down a base coat of brown with some very rough shading - everything under the solebar will get a dirty black, and a good amount of weathering on the lower third after I have some decals to put on it: Underside has some ball lead: It is only as I write this that I see that one of the springs has come off - fiddlesticks!

Thanks @Guy Rixon - my plan is for the short branch and additional station at Croydon to have stayed open - so a prime candidate for commuter traffic and would definitely have been electrified at least partially. It falls into the same category as the West Croydon, Wimbledon, Crystal Palace area of lots of viaducts and few tunnels, so I'm fairly comfortable with the converted units being around there - but I'm just not clear on what other EMUs would have roamed the rails at that early stage in those areas previously dominated by the AC overheads. I've seen pictures of push-pull sets with additional coaches on the 'wrong' side of the loco so I'm also fairly happy to do that - probably a nice bit of operational interest for trains which would otherwise just shuttle in and out. The wiki page notes that the Maunsell sets were originally three coaches - BTK-CK-BTK for the west of england, but these were modified with various design changes, but it doesn't detail if the sets changed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR_Maunsell_carriage - This page notes the Bulleid coach sets in the same way - mostly BTK-CK-BTK (http://www.user.dccnet.com/d.leech/bulleidguide.pdf) but build dates post-war, which I didn't realise - so would be quite mutually exclusive with Maunsell olive :)

Hello! I've always found a strange attraction to the malachite green livery of the Southern - much like a beige Mk.1 Fiesta it seems to loop all the way around so far past ugly that it's back to being cool again - so I thought that it might be prudent to investigate as an alternative setting for my notional future layout, originally earmarked for pre-group). I am quite confident in choosing appropriate stock for that 19th century terminus - Terriers and D's for most of the suburban and outer suburban services, with C's and E's for freight. Coaches would be four and six wheelers of various vintages. In the pre-war period however, I'm a little more lost - What 2-4 bogie-coach formations would one expect to see on a branch suburban terminus at this time? My research so far has been unable to turn up much of value for the late Maunsell/early Bulleid period at all. Would you see push-pull sets from the pre-group companies and/or as converted on suburban services, or were they more branch-line than mainline? Would we still see four and six wheelers, or would these have been well and truly shipped out to the most backward of branch lines by now? I assume that converted LBSCR AC multiple units would mostly be in evidence those areas that had just been converted to 3rd rail from overhead i.e. 2SL (ex. SL), 2Wim (ex. CW) and 3CP (ex. CP) sets? Would it be broadly accurate to presume that 1948 shed allocations (excepting withdrawls) would represent late Southern Railway allocations? Thank you for reading and all the very best,