Lacathedrale

I would caution against going TOO small - that said, there are many interesting 'bitsa' layouts in that size. Check out 'Building Cameo Layouts' or 'Finescale in Small Spaces' by Iain Rice maybe?

I'm loving the DJLC entry - what wonderful trackwork. Do you have any more details on it that you'd be willing to share?

2mm association instructions suggested 9 or 9.5mm wheels for the Jinty chassis that is available from Shop 3 - I used these and found that I needed to grind away a fair bit of metal from the inside of the body/splashers for them to fit. The 57xx conversion has the same equivocal recommendation, does it also require clearing out white metal from the loco to fit the 9.5mm wheels? Since I have the 9.5's to-hand, I would rather not order another three axles + quartering jig plates if I don't need to, but I'm not sure if I want to push my luck again with a rotary tool!

That chaired pointwork looks really... on point. It looks heavy and substantial, really good stuff.

Also, cheeky rename - Hound Tor is a legit place, but didn't fit particularly well - Hennock is a real town on the River Teign, and the name just fits a little better I think!

I've spent the last two weekends helping a friend move to a stone's throw from the Rivet Teign (as per my original post about this layout!), and my previous holiday with my Grandma was to Swanage - so lots of time in Peco country. I was somewhat cynical about Iain Rice's idea of jigsaw track pieces which fit into baseboards, but given this travail it would certainly have been a significantly more easy thing to resolve if I'd done that. With that in mind, I've sourced some 2mm ply and I will be mounting the entry turnout and exit out to the FY as a single unit. Last week after some rather dubious weathering attempts on some LMS Suburbans, I took @justin1985's advice to keep it subtle on the autocoach, just using some inks: It's just plonked on - no 2FS wheels or couplers - but I thought that the bright sunshine captured the feel of sunny Devon quite well. I also have rebuilt the turnout - it will need the rest of the sleepers soldered, but I can bat a wagon down it using an x-acto handle and it stays on in all directions. Though it's not exactly a very complicated piece of track, nor am I pushing any boundaries with chairplates or detailing - I feel that I have incorporated enough little bits of knowledge along the way that it wil be successful: a joggle, a set bend, switchblades with the top 'corner' shaved down a little, and much checking and re-checking of flangeways with 0.5mm brass strip: Just in the shot top-left is my indispensible 6-in-1 nail file, perfect for smoothing out 2FS trackwork You'll see I've left long tails on the pointwork, deliberately because I want to make double-sure that it all connects properly. If anyone has any suggestions for ensuring accurate end-on rail connections I'd really appreciate it. I am happy to add a barrow crossing to cover up any particularly involved ideas - on the layout it's the station throat at the end of a platform.

It's well and truly past the point (ha!) of no-return now! Having reviewed the site, I think creating it chaired would be a waste - it'd be the only turnout on the layout done so, and is not visible from my usual photography angles - and since the whole point is to make the layout operationally sound, maybe that's best left for the next endeavour Daily reminder to never use bloody cork underlay again Quite how I'm going to keep the rails in vertical alignment I don't know....

So, there are two problems with my little plank layout that need to be addressed before it can reasonably be operated - the entry turnout was one of my earlier efforts and is sub-standard, and there are rail gaps which are slightly too large for comfort where larger sections needed to be dropped in between others (i.e. one side of a runaround loop). In future I'll not compromise on the quality of track added to a layout, and will use a piercing saw through a hole drilled into the basebaord to electrically isolate sections after the fact, rather than relying on separately laid flimsy sections measured so precisely. In terms of resolving the damage, I need to a) replace the entry turnout ( My plan is to try to use a spatula or equivalent on the existing turnout after I've ensured all rail joints around it are clear of solder.) and b) find a way to smoothly join rails which are 2-3mm apart. (My plan thanks to @justin1985 is to slice out a larger section and splice it back in). The new entry turnout will be built with the 'fiddle' track attached as one piece so there's no rail joint hidden in the backscene, and may even try to build it chaired!

Interesting and thanks for that recommendation, I'll check it out next. It seems for Brake vehicles, there was a predominance of BTK's, and BCK's. For dedicated passenger stock, corridor coaches vastly outnumbered open coaches, but the largest single denomination was the Third Open followed by CK and TK's - everything else constituted less than 4% the total LMS stock. Similarly, everything else (Restaurants, Sleepers, etc.) also made up less than 5%. That is to say, if one had twenty LMS-built coaches in their collection, if that were a reflection of the total stock (instead of a given train) they would have five brakes (four BTK's and a BCK), five TO's, five TK's, three CK's and two of the any of the remaining score of coach types. This is only account for LMS built coaches however, which only numbered around eight thousand from 1923 to nationalisation, as opposed to the twenty six thousand inherited from the pre group companies, more than half from the LNWR. Quite how that LNWR stock integrated is something I should dig into deeper - lots of brake vans and some whole secondary trains, it seems!

I've got two prototypes that I have any remote chance of taking forward to any kind of finished state - the SE&CR (East London Railway) and pre-war LMS. I have carriage books for both of these, the former is very helpful with giving specific coach set details and then how the sets were allocated to different services -but the latter is something of a mystery. I picked up Passenger Train Formations 1923-1983 LMS-LM Region on recommendation from here and it does indeed show many formations through the decades of my interest, but I can't seem to find any rhyme or reason to them other than that more often than not, a BT or BC would braket a given rake. The use of open or corridor stock seems absolutely arbitrary, as does the location of thrd vs composite vs location of restaurant or sleepers! I'm sure there must be some logic to this, beyond the obvious examples where trains have been made up en route and so have brakes sandwiched in the middle, etc.!

OK, maybe for the sake of an extra foot I should just stomach it, then! Thank you!

I'll be listening on the way to work - bravo on giving it a shot, a (model) railway themed podcast has been on my 'to do' list for ages!

Would a typical unmodified loco with six coupled driving wheels (or a co-co diesel wheel arrangement) go around a 390mm radius curve with/without gauge widening? It seems that the standard minimum in Templot is 500mm. My thoughts are literally just that while I'm still struggling through loco building, it would be nice to have a loop of track to run them on - and a 3' square board that folds in half seems pretty easy to build/store/etc. Best,

I too have only ever seen pictures of the LBSC OHLE, I'd love to know where I might find some remnants!

Gotcha, so if I want a single LED (for the signalbox interior) then I should use as standalone LED with resistor, yes?

Three of them should be more than enough for lighting the diorama - only about 6" x 4" x 4" - but I wanted to have a separately lit signalbox interior, as @Dave John has spoken about - I gather that I can run that off the same 12v supply, but maybe with a separate switch, and a resistor to limit the current? I don't really know how that works!

I've got one of those big self-adhesive strips of LEDs that I was using to light up a layout - they're lovely and bright, and very low profile. these are the specific Amazon item: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00WQFP3AO/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 I'd like to use half a dozen to light up a little diorama - but would rather not have a power connector, so my thoughts were a pushbutton with a timer on the front, and a battery box underneath. The whole diorama needs to fit into roughly 24cm x 12cm x 20cm including the frame so space is fairly tight! Thanks so much,

Ah right, I understand now - when you say LCDR 4-wheelers, do you mean the aforementioned six wheelers with the middle axle removed? I gather that the 100-seater bogie stock was another thrust to try to rid themselves of the earlier non-bogie high capacity fixed sets? Thanks!

Here is my LMS Cattle wagon, finished bar couplings: I used Halfords grey primer for the body, then gloss varnish to seal and added transfers (gloss brush painted over the transfers when they were set too). After that, I did an oil wash of black and some brown/white to tone it down, scrubbed off with an earbud dipped in thinner afer an hour or so. When that had settled overnight, I shot a coat of matt varnish ontop and then a little sleeper grime along the solebars and underframe. Unfortunately one side has broken strapping and the other has a gap in the roofline - but generally I'm pleased with how this has come out!

I finished up my single slip - I missed a joggle and/or set in the stock rails, and the switchblades on the K crossing are a little short - but it technically does function. I'm going to leave this as part of a diorama/photoplank I think: The body isn't perfect on this LMS cattle wagon, but I'm really pleased at how the underframe has come together - everything lines up and looks decent. It's in the paint shop now to come out in LMS light grey (D1840?): Unfortunately despite some assistance from @justin1985 and @queensquare my Jinty chassis just won't work. I've got a replacement etch so that's probably next in the shop, if I can stomach it

Interesting, I would have thought the six wheelers would have replaced the four wheelers, rather than be simply retired.

I've got both Gould books which are wonderful as a source of reference but it's very difficult for me to glean a useful picture, so I was hoping I could type up my findings here, such as they are, and appeal to those with better knowledge to correct any of my most egregious mistakes. I appreciate there's lots more research to do! Overview The SE&CR inherited many assorted coaches from the SER and LCDR. Generally, other than dual braking anything that was vacuum braked very little was done in the way of improvement to older coaches. They were specifically known for having uneven rooflines and being a shoddy mish-mash of styles and ages for anything but the most prestigious boat trains. Four and six wheeled coaches/brake vans would be occasionally added to trains, but not marshalled between bogie coaches - it was fairly common to see six-wheeled brake vans on services- but by 1922 all longer distance trains consisted of bogie stock. Generally, bogie stock was mounted on fox pattern on 8’ wheelbase, except shortest coaches (such as those built for the Folkestone Harbour branch) Liveries Coaches would have been painted a purple lake livery initially and then Wellington Brown in the lead-up to/post war. Destination boards would normally be ‘fixed’ - vermillion with gold lettering shaded black. ‘Continental Boat Express, London & Folkestone Harbour’, etc. Sets and Rakes Fixed rakes of coaches (and then officially fixed sets in 1910) were de rigour - generally introduced in A, B, C and D varieties: A set (50 and 54’): TB, CL, BCL B set (46'): TB, 3C, CB C set (60’?): TB, CL, BCL D set (60'?): BCL, C, TB Suburban sets were using both fixed and bogie coaches in close-coupled formations: Example 5-set coach suburban set: LCDR: TB F, C*, S, TB (* SER) 1890 Close coupled stock (40’ bogies): TB, S, T, T, F, TB 1914 Close coupled stock: TB, S, F TB The continental traffic was a major part of the prestige and focus for the company, with 'American' cars being built by the SER and then pullman cars incorporated into the standard trains. Some example trains: 1908 boat train: to Dover: C, B to Folkestone: 3C, C, C, C, F, F, F, BC 1909 continental mail: SB, POT, POT, POS, POT (6w), C, C, F, TB 1910 boat train from CX: SB, C, C, PFP ‘Corunna’ , PFB ‘Florence’ , F ,F , F, C, SB 1910 boat train from Vic: from Victoria: 6w B, C, F, PFP ’Savona’ , PFB ‘Valencia’ , F, F, C, C from Holborn: C, C, 6w B 1915 + mail trains: POT, POS, PMV, PMV 1920 boat trains relegated preceding stock to spares and were themselves steel panelled 60'ers. Areas of doubt When one would cease to see four wheeled and six wheeled coaching stock in the London termini? Clearly they hung on for quite a while (information about 14-coach trains stabled for 'excursions' and work trains made up of this stock). Would this stock have lived on in their precursor liveries? i.e. the LCDR varnished teak/etc. The 'Hundred Seater' coaches built in the early 20's for electrification that never came in the fashion the SE&CR envisaged - how did they run? For an illustrative coaching stock in the pre-WW1 period, for a secondary London terminus, I would imagine roughly: Partial boat train formations Sets of SER/LCDR 6w coaches for short distance commuter services Sets of SECR close-coupled bogie stock (or 54' trio-C sets) for suburban services (and/or 100-seaters?) Sets of 60' Trio-D's for longer distance services Any thoughts, observations, etc. gladly appreciated. All the best,

Lovely building - is it from the area? I can't place the track layout anywhere around Ewer St. but I've only ever seen it post -90's

Honestly, I recommended this unit to a friend based on the price but I'm really honestly considering reverting to DC...

Well yes in retrospect that would have been a good idea