Lacathedrale

You're not wrong - but I did want to be able to host tender locos such as the B1 Gladstones, and G-class Singles - which seems that about 55 feet minimum is required between the switchblades of the turnout and the buffers. Central Croydon's odd buffer arrangement of wedges instead of actual track buffers means that I could probably get away with that as written. It would mean the E- and D-classes would look pretty natural with a few inches either side, where the more rare tender locos could just about squeeze in. I'm not aware of any practise where a runaround would be constructed small enough that only some locos would be able to use it - but if I did that, I guess it would be an opportunity for the station pilot to shine by peeling off the coaches Minories-style. There was a turntable at the end of Fairfield where these tender locos would shuffle off to, to be turned (part of the reason why Stroudley did his best to wipe out the Craven tender locos that preceeded his tenure, it seems!) - so maybe the runaround is less important to them. In any case, with shorter runaround pockets the gap between the pointwork increases from six to eight inches. Still not great, and I'm not sure that stealing another two and precluding tender locos from using the runaround would make a huge amount of difference? I did have a thought in the car on the way to work today, which was maybe to flip the schematic front-to-back, so the unobstructed rear siding was towards the front, instead of hidden behind platform buildings and a sawtooth canopy. It could be a nice framing device as-is, but it means only the (current) north inside platform face and the runaround are going to show the bottom half of the locos and stock I'd be building for the layout! I think it could compromise the realism of the layout a bit more, because it would imply the pilot would constantly be going out along the 'up' main to shunt carriages (i.e. an area ostensibly controlled by the next signal box) - rather than the 'down' main which would be controlled by the box on-layout.

Greenwich Park drawn with Templot over the OS map looks promising initially, but is a real space hog. That double runaround formation is a hair under four feet by itself, and the throat is three feet. As drawn there's three feet of plain track in the middle: Were this to fit in my space, that whole middle section would have to be chopped out. If the buffer end of the station were plain, it would be passable - but seeing as there's this really distinctive formation, having it right up against the throat just won't look right. It's shared by both Central Croydon and Greenwich Park which made me want to include it. Disregarding the OS map and drawing the track straight into templot, it looks like the below, fitting into a seven foot visible space with some room to spare around the edges for scenic work, and breaks nicely into my 4' + 3' declension: I'm still not totally happy with the middle road turnouts - but it does seem serviceable. Any thoughts? Operationally I see the layout set in the 1880's - ochre LBSCR passenger tank locos and four/six-wheeled coaches pulling in and running around, while larger tender locos escape back up the branch to get turned by the mainline before heading back in, all the while an E1 or A1 shuttles NPCS and coaches around the terminus. Only the rumbling of a slow loaded gravel train from the kickback Fairfield Yard (off layout) hauled by a grubby tender loco interrupts the intensive service. If we fudge the timeline, maybe the north platform stables the LNWR Willesden train, or provides a spot for a GER train from Liverpool Street?

In an attempt to fill a pretty dull evening in a hotel I thought about working out the templot overlay for Greenwich Park terminus - it had an unusual throat, and a pair of symmetrical three-way turnouts - one of the strangest things appears to be the turnout highlighted below - with less than a 1:4 crossing angle: The original OS grid map link is here; https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.65666666666667&lat=51.4785&lon=-0.0100&layers=168&b=1 After some poking around I can get it to an A4 but it still seems like a pretty intense curve. The middle track would only have been used for locos running around (and at that only aged 1860's 0-4-2 tanks - which were fitted with push-pull apparatus and thus just shuttled in and out of the bays). The rest of the geometry fits fine into B6 and B8 turnouts - but this one is a real doozy. Am I doing something hilariously wrong?

Thank you! I've got enough to get me by this weekend, but a litre of Mek (I have a Slaters bottle of it almost finished) and syringes are on the cards for the next round of purchases. That's really reassuring to hear - Trevor Nunn just got back to me with the same opinion so I'm really chuffed that I'm on the right track. Thank you for the tip on the size -- I think you're implying that the length should be long enough, which I did assume. I'm not looking to model live steam but in terms of length it looks like I could fit a 5" gauge axle in there (I appreciate that actually turning it might be a different matter entirely). I'm a little unsure as to whether to curate tools/accessories to go with it, or just go with a set such as this - I get the impression that a vertical slide would be more useful than a face plate or steadies but don't really know what I don't know yet.

I have two questions, one of which I think I know the answer to: Should I be using Slaters Plastic Weld, MEK, superglue or A.N. Other glue to fix association plastic chairs to ply sleepers? I think MEK should be fine. Will this lathe be powerful enough to use with the assocation wheel form tool, assuming the tire/blank is shaped to roughly the correct profile ahead of time? (As an associated question - would this lathe be powerful enough for small live-steam work?)

For those of the society with many years experience building in S-scale, or whose hobby has included lots of kit and scratchbuilding I'm sure the answers to most questions are self evident. For the rest of us however, I wonder if it might be useful to have a place for Q and A? Even if the answer is 'check out this article' or 'read this book' ?

@jamespetts these trains were via Kensington (Addison Rd) and Crystal Palace (Low Level) apparently - though of the origin I'm not sure. http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/central_croydon/index7.shtml http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/central_croydon/index6.shtml Presumably the signal boxes are the same in both photographs? The workshops are evident in the 1896 OS map and the 1932 aerial photograph, but I can't make them out in the 1896 photograph.

Interesting stuff, @Dr Gerbil-Fritters - based on some off-forum discussion earlier in the year I thought the Irish layout was in limbo. It's great to see that it's alive and kicking.

I believe there's a shot of an L on the turntable at Caterham on one of the Caterham railway/branchline books - AFAIK pre-grouping - I'm not clear on when it was photographed but I'll try to dig it out this weekend incase it helps.

I think I've heard of the SER specifically using shingle - your post has joined up the dots @Fat Controller , thank you.

Poking around various old maps there are lots of stations and depots in the south London suburban areas which were (at least notionally) owned by pre-grouping companies which are islands among the southern companies. I can't remember the specific mapping - but there are Midland, Great Northern, London & North Western and Great Eastern depots dotted around the suburban loop lines radiating out between london bridge and victoria all the way down towards Surrey and Kent. In the case of the GER, they had their own station at New Cross Low Level via the East London Railway lines, and in the case of the LNWR they shared Central Croydon off the brighton mainline via Kensington Olympia. Was this a case of liveried locomotives and stock traversing across their networks, over the thames and plunging into the smoky morass of rural south beyond London? Or were trains of coaches or wagons handed over between companies at an appropriate place. I.e. the GER would shuttle 'their' coal train into an area in Bermondsey to be collected by a Brighton loco for its onward journey, or the LNWR would deposit coaches at Clapham Junction (I actually have no idea what the route from Kensington to Crystal Palace looks like - is it the route the overground takes from Shephards Bush to East Crodon?). All the best,

Nice! If it's just a case of having some wagons with tarps over them for building sand/gravel, I'm totally happy with that! Thank you, all.

I've been mulling this over, and infact I think I may have found a really compelling prototype. Central Croydon was a very short lived branch off of the brighton mainline created by the LBSCR when it completed the line from Victoria to Croydon in the 1860's - there was already an 'East Croydon', so the lines ran to a new set of platforms named 'New Croydon' on the far side of the station. Apparently this was deemed to be too far from the centre of the town so a small branch was built, so a 1/3 mile branch was built to serve a suburban terminus right in the heart of the town. Unfortunately for some unknown reason, trains that departed from this new terminus into the city were all slow stopping services - so it was much quicker for patrons to walk the 5 minutes to East Croydon and get a fast train - and after less than four years the branch and station was closed. What I think was pretty captivating was that it re-opened after the completion of Blackfriars for through trains from the London & North Western via Crystal Palace/Kensington and the Great Eastern via the East London Railway - effectively a joint terminus for the LBSCR, GER and LNWR in the heart of the brighton mainline - Umber and Ochre brighton locos rubbing shoulders with royal blue GER and blackberry black LNWR liveries. Nobody would believe you! I've had a quick play with the layout plan, and there's certainly alot to do - but I think it does suffer from not having the full set of crossovers operationally - unfortunately there is no way to include them on the visible part of the layout - it would crush the staging entrance to be right up against the station throat pointwork. Happily there is a prototype example of this very arrangement. Below is a link to the OS grid map for Greenwich Park station. There appear to be a set of scissor crossovers underneath the 'P.H' marking on the map, in a tunnel! https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.049999999999994&lat=51.4782&lon=-0.0100&layers=168&b=1 If you follow the line of the westernmost platform, it would be unable to reach the up mainline without this extra pointwork, but it is some distance (and a bridge away) from the rest of the pointwork. After some thought, I actually quite like the look of the trackwork for greenwich park, so I have superimposed it into the plan for this layout and it works quite nicely: With gaps at 4' and 7' the trackwork easily maps to portable three and four foot boards. I see the Fiddle-Yard board containing Park Lane Bridge and the endcap backscene about six inches inboard of the joint, while the track itself will terminate ready for cassette loading at that point. Scenically I would imagine the station using Central Croydon's sawtooth canopies and station building, you will see provisions for them in the left of the plan: (credit; Disused Stations http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/central_croydon/) Just out of interest here are few pictures of Greenwich Park station whose track plan I have surreptitiously pinched, which as per the usual miserly LCDR practice looks pretty grim. The following shot was taken roughly from where the green pilot loco in my plan is located: And here's another shot looking from the bufferstops towards the tunnel portal - you can see a signal box and the bridge covering the rest of the station throat: It would be lovely to include that signal box and I think it would make an effective view block in what would otherwise be a fairly abrupt transition from track to retaining wall and buildings overhead but the geometry in XtrkCAD where I'm sketching this prior to drawing in templot makes it impossible to fit.

Yes indeed - I see the same designs for 'loco sand' so I wondered if that was the standard method for transporting - as you said it's higher density and I can't imagine it would be all that fun to move around while it's wet either.

So as a complete coincidence, two stations of interest to me, New Cross (LBSCR) and Central Croydon both have 'sand and gravel pits' adjacent. The former hosts one on a kickback by Cold Blow crossing which forms access to a gravel pit alongside the main loco sheds alongside a the Old Kent Road spur, see here: https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.11999999999999&lat=51.4787&lon=-0.0443&layers=168&b=1 Central Croydon was gone by 1890, but the tangent of track from the brighton mainline crossed a larged open space with another gravel pit, access to which was via a headshunt right towards the station area - see here https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17.631666666666668&lat=51.3732&lon=-0.0965&layers=168&b=1 although it is likely this wasn't concurrent with the station, being absent from the 1868 map while the station was in situ and in evidence in the 1894-5 map linked previous (it was situation where 'Town Hall' is written). Is it as simple as company and private owner wagons being filled up? Would those strange 'garden shed' wagons have been required? Would it have been a mix?

I found your original premise using the Royal Scot tender drive units to be really unique - I gather that it's less a change in requirements and more a refinement of the solution that you've now gone to a more standard motor arrangement? It seems that the arrangement of a motor in the tender with a universal joint powering a gearbox in the loco is a pretty standard solution in 2mm - but I gather this is more a concern around the space available than a need specifically to drive the loco driving wheels. Certainly the premise would appear to make something like a single loco more approachable! I don't know why I've always just had it taken as a given that the loco wheels 'should' be driven. Presumably in the way that steam power 'should' be the driving force, I hear you say :) It's really interesting how that when painted black the paper façade on the wheels is really effective. I imagine a dry brush with a very slightly lighter shade of black (or brown, muck) would highlight the edges more and bring them forward visually?

Not at all, I was going to go with painting it in a Madge livery of red/white/black - but I couldn't resist the link to East Croydon station. I'm quite a ways away from painting yet but I do appreciate the tip - I'm sure it would have come up when I started looking at fixing the ironwork on but that's very helpful. I guess that prototype is more suitable for a scratchbuild a little ways down the line Also super helpful, I've got some brass sheet laying around in my workshop that I may attempt to use up for something, but happy to try NS too. Either way the process will be entirely new to me having only worked in plastic and styrene to date so it's all very exciting. I am hoping to sell some bits and bobs laying around the house and sorting out a lathe I can call my own too and I'm quite looking forward to that.

Excellent! At the risk of monopolising this thread, I thought I'd post a small update: I know it's early days and I've not even thought about how I'm going to scratchbuild in brass (although I have ordered "Model Locomotive Construction in 4mm Scale" by Guy Williams to start to figure that out) - but this really is a lovely scale to work in so far. The brake gear is just out of shot but that's all sweated together too, and the solebars are prepped too - so it's just a case of stringing it together. I'm going to try to build this to Hall & Co (see below) which had a hinged top plank on the door:

In the spirit of @ScottW's original post I hope I can post my first effort here too, crossposted from Kitbuilding subforum but I'll see if we can keep it in here instead: I've tried a fair few scales and gauges since getting back into model railways about two years ago - each one with some areas that left me with some feeling of dissatisfaction - in 7mm I found the models rewarding to build but the size required for even the most simple of layouts prohibitive. I abandoned EM after seeing Peco's new track (and that it would be a pain to rewheel all the EMUs I'd just bought) in favour of OO - but with the layout down I was quickly bored with buying everything off the shelf and felt a little hemmed in. I have found the most enjoyment so far from 2mm - but I'm starting to wonder if I am cut out for it; it's been over two years and I've attempted to build four locos, none of which have come close to working as intended. The small size meant that I felt I was mostly just fighting with material tolerances and static, surface tensions, etc. than modelling. I did briefly try 3mm but found it had neither the commercial nor society support, and had the drawback that the scale would inherit some of the issues I was having with 2mm. A few emails to Stephen Rabone, Jim Guthrie and Susie Frith and now I'm a member of the society and I'm putting together my first s-scale wagon: This is the society's RCH 1907 seven plank, end door wagon. I've taken Phil Parker's lead and used a piece of rod and some strapping (with 20 thou boltheads sliced out of rod thank you @ScottW) This is my first ever compensated piece of stock actually !! The next steps are to get the bearings and brake gear sorted. I used a Garryflex block to buff out the brass and it came out a real treat - much easier than scrubbing with a fibreglass pencil. My observations so far are that the wheel standards are really fine and look great, and the size of the wagon seems just about perfect. I'm not sure how I would have done if I didn't have access to Phil's blow-by-blow build process but I guess that's just all part of the fun. EDIT: May the subject 'What's on your S-scale workbench?' would make it clear this is a community thread (in line with the 2mm and 3mm equivalents) if that is the goal?

I've tried a fair few scales and gauges since getting back into model railways about two years ago - each one with some areas that left me with some feeling of dissatisfaction - in 7mm I found the models rewarding to build but the size required for even the most simple of layouts prohibitive. I abandoned EM after seeing Peco's new track (and that it would be a pain to rewheel all the EMUs I'd just bought) in favour of OO - but with the layout down I was quickly bored with buying everything off the shelf and felt a little hemmed in. I have found the most enjoyment so far from 2mm - but I'm starting to wonder if I am cut out for it; it's been over two years and I've attempted to build four locos, none of which have come close to working as intended. The small size meant that I felt I was mostly just fighting with material tolerances and static, surface tensions, etc. than modelling. I did briefly try 3mm but found it had neither the commercial nor society support, and had the drawback that the scale would inherit some of the issues I was having with 2mm. Enter S-scale - 20% larger than 4mm but with almost 70% more volume. No commercial support, and no chance of Bachmann releasing a loco I've just spent six months building. All the fun of track laying, with a scant few kits - and a ton of scratch building. I promised myself I would learn a new skill and while I have been brushing up on Fusion 360 for some resin 3D printing to come in future, it feels like this is a wonderful opportunity to learn to use a lathe. A few emails to Stephen Rabone, Jim Guthrie and Susie Frith and now I'm a member of the society and I'm putting together my first s-scale wagon: This is the society's RCH 1907 seven plank, end door wagon. I've taken Phil Parker's lead and used a piece of rod and some strapping (with 20 thou boltheads sliced out of rod) This is my first ever compensated piece of stock actually - the rear W-iron pair are on a separate pivoting sub-assembly. The next steps are to get the bearings and brake gear sorted. I used a Garryflex block to buff out the brass and it came out a real treat - much easier than scrubbing with a fibreglass pencil. My observations so far are that the wheel standards are really fine and look great, and the size of the wagon seems just about perfect. I'm not sure how I would have done if I didn't have access to Phil's blow-by-blow build process but I guess that's just all part of the fun. I've ordered some styrene and my next build will be a scratchbuild body on an association etched chassis.

Hi Scott, I'm aware this is S - thank you! I'm thinking of dabbling in it, because life isn't hard enough in 2FS

I've penned many plans which describe urban termini, but rarely have they been built. Many years ago Bob Hughes (of I believe, RMweb) designed a 'bitsa' station called Sutton Road which represented just the station buffers, with the remainder of the station notionally 'off layout' but in reality nonexistent. This kicked off a train of thought and discussion which described how proper stage management (of the theatrical kind) could deemphasise our oft less-than-scale train lengths by chopping the train up with scene dividers such as buildings and bridges, as well as focusing on the areas of interest such as a station throat or bufferstop. A link to Sutton Park is on Carl Arendt's Micro Layouts for Model Railroads site here (and links to 'Southwark Park', one of my early efforts at designing in Templot): http://www.carendt.com/small-layout-scrapbook/page-103-november-2010/ I wrote a couple of plans which focused on this, including one where a commenter even suggested I move from S7 to S-scale (which is interesting, seeing as I'm toying with that idea right now!). The result of this experimentation is thus, a 10' by 1'8" shelf layout, depicting the throat and platform ends of a suburban terminus. Stage left is the truncated station - the middle area shows the station throat before diving into a tunnel .The other half of the crossover (to permit the dock and lower platform face to get on the running rails) is assumed to be off-scene. On the Crystal Palace High Level prototype, there was an overall roof (see here: for an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Palace_(High_Level)_railway_station#/media/File:Crystal_Palace_High_Level_Station_1908.JPG) ) and had a signal box adjacent and then almost immediately dive into a tunnel (see here: https://boroughphotos.org/lambeth/high-level-station-crystal-palace-upper-norwood-3/) Of course - it had dozens of sidings and many more platform roads than this layout could support! There aren't very many photos, but the Greenwich Park branch shows a more low-key approach to the same problem - canopies on the platforms, and the station throat running into a tunnel almost immediately (see here;http://disused-stations.org.uk/g/greenwich_park/index.shtml ) The station pilot siding is taken from the ELR's Norton Folgate plan - each side of the station having a pilot siding (presumably to support the GER's fast turnaround 'jazz train' services). Operationally, the layout is a minories plan - trains arrive and are pulled back out by suburban tank locos that simmer in the loco pocket. 'Diverted' specials and boat trains would have tender locos that would need to be released and exit before being turned and rejoining the next outbound service. NPCS such as parcels, newspapers et al. could be shunted into the dock siding at the front of the layout. Logistically, the Tim Horn baseboards I potentially have available for a layout are 4' + 3' + 3' and this fits nicely - all of the pointwork is on one board (depicted above as a symmetric threeway but presumably an asymmetric to match british prototypes). In terms of stock - a passenger train of half a dozen four-wheelers, four six-wheelers (pictured) or three bogie coaches comfortably fits into all of the platform roads with any generic victorian tank/tender loco. It is my assumption that the FY would be cassettes, so while the 10' limit can be adhered to when space is constrained, longer trains (such as the bogie coach train with a horse or parcels van) can be staged when the layout is out of my home environment. One would assume a secondary station like this would be the domain of robust tank engines like the LBSCR D1's, GER J68's or SECR H-classes by the turn of the century - but if the SE&CR can run an L1 (allegedly one of their most premiere 4-4-0 boat train expresses) down the sleepy ex-single track Caterham branch, then I think one could justify some interesting tender locos here too. One of the key, obvious drawbacks is the lack of goods stock - there would be almost no justification for any railway to offload minerals or vans of individual goods at a station like this - it would have been handled by Ewer Street, Bishopsgate, etc. - but presumably newspapers, parcels and the occasional dignitary's horse/carriage wagon would be appropriate. Scenically, much would depend on ensuring there was sufficient Z-axis variation - setting the tracks on a mid level with drainage ditches between, and staggered verticality - platforms, roof supports, retaining walls, overall roof, footbridges and the like would all need to be effectively managed to ensure the layout didn't become boxy - another reason to angle the bay platform tracks and have the retaining walls not parallel with the backscene or module divisions. Anyway, I hope you've enjoyed reading this - it's given me alot to think about! All the best,

May I ask how you made/scribed the planks on your wagons? It seems you're using 40thou for the sides/backs and floor, 80thou for the headstocks and 2*40thou for the solebars, with 5 thou strip for ironwork and 20thou rod for rivets - is that correct? Are the solebar ironworks (not just the v-hangers) produced somewhere? I'd like to give it a bash myself at some point and this looks so clean and well done I feel like I could learn loads from just studying the pictures...

Oh, oh! I love everything about this plan - Central Croydon, New Cross Gate Low Level and all The old Addiscombe branch line terminus is definitely rural rather than surburban. Really interested to see how this develops. I think one of the more interesting things about Central Croydon is how the centre roads of the station must have formed the headshunt for the adjacent gravel pits (although I guess you could argue they weren't concurrent!) - so almost exactly the way that most people orient a 'goods yard' into a Minories plan (normally a kickback on an extra siding parallel the station)

That seems to be by John Hayes rather than Geoff Kent? I have ordered it as recommended. Prior to this I ordered Geoff Kent's 'Minerals and Hoppers' - thank you!