Martin S-C

I like women's clothes too! Oh, of this era. Well, yes, back then as well. So elegant. The gentlemen as well. Today's male clothes seem to be the most boring and inelegant they have ever been - ever. As to corsetry - you and I will have to disagree Annie!

Some of us are third class, some are first class, some have their own private trains and some didn't pay at all and are going along the compartments robbing the decent folks. Mm. Sorry about that, not a Dark Place in my case, just 1.5 G&Ts into the evening.

I've seen the grey plastic/foam cladding to put around water pipes used as bonce-protectors on a couple of duck-under designs. Available from B&Q, Wickes or any similar DIY outlet. You slit the foam down one side, uncurl it a little, slice out a 90deg chunk and "wrap" the other 270deg of open tube around the lower edge/corner of baseboard people will be going under. Add quantities of duct tape to hold in place as desired.

Erm... well Germany suffered rather badly in the power vacuum that followed did it not?

I agree. A lot of 4mm layouts would just be better in 0, period; its such a great scale where trains have that much more mass and presence and you can really appreciate a quality painting job on a loco or coach. But the "small empire" concept with trains of 2 or 3 4-wheel coaches and freights of 6 wagons hauled by industrial tank engines pottering between hedges and around curves to nowhere in particular would have a lot of charm in the bigger scale. CJF was a skilled draughtsman (some of his loco drawings are beautiful) and he was a prolific planner but some of his work looks a good deal like other bits of it rehashed and he did have a fondness for main line passenger workings and roundy-roundy or outy-and-backy designs neither of which particularly appeal to me. I'm very much an end-to-end type of guy, where trains must go somewhere, do something meaningful while they are there and come back. I am not sure I would even be happy for long with a terminus-fiddle yard arrangement.

I hate to sound like all these great ideas are bouncing off my stubborn hide, but I do very much like my existing plan and would really hate to have to significantly change it. In my mind many trains have already run on it and it feels already built, so to speak. I have a very limited headroom in the conversion as well so multi-levels probably would not be that successful, I think it would begin to get a little claustrophobic in there. I've never visited one of these USA style constructions on multi-levels but having seen fiddle yards below termini on British layouts I find the whole set up awkward and even a bit dark and gloomy. I suppose good under-board lighting on the higher levels will fix that but I still get the impression it would be like peering at the lower level of your layout through a kind of giant letterbox opening. I probably just need to experience a couple of good examples of the multi-level idea to have my views changed but every photo I see of them is taken in a huge American basement with ample aisle room and headroom which I just don't have. I just feel that in such a narrow room as I have it would begin to look like a set of bookshelves. I suppose you could have a series of helices at each narrow end of the room, with the scenic boards stacked one atop the other along one long wall (the "south" wall in my case) and then you'd enter the room via the existing (NW) door and have quite a lot of unused floor space for storage, workbench and even a comfy chair or two. I still just find it a big mental leap to see myself enjoying a layout that is not "all one scene in and of itself" and where I'd have to sit down to play at the lowest level and stand on a small stool to play with trains on the top level. Bear in mind too, that my design has inspiration in British modelling from the 1930s to the 1960s and bringing to bear more modern solutions to the problem somehow does not feel like I'm being honest to my chosen source of inspiration. P D Hancock had only a smallish bedroom to build his layout but he never contemplated multi-levels as far as I'm aware. A multi-level Madder Valley Railway seems positively alien.

The pretention is brought under control by the Formica tables - they give it that necessary little touch of blue collar honesty. The Feng Shui isn't fully in balance but they help.

And finished... (I redid the running number as I didn't like the smaller italic font).

My layout has no continuous run so there is no loop to be out of. We are all sans-loops here.

I can see myself doing what you plan... getting down on the "boatman's plank" and then just laying there and shutting my eyes... I guess you're talking about a wheeled car inspection trolley type thingywhatsit, but there's still the getting down and getting up again. The little wheeled gizmo is cute, and it saves half the downwards and upwards vertical journeys I am just wondering about clearance now... or should I say loading gauge "do not lean out of the train while passing into tunnels". As to the entrance door I shall most definitely shamelessly copy St Enodoc's "lifting canal bridge" engineering solution as Stubby47 linked to in post #333. Its so gorgeously cool I loathe my very existence for not thinking of it first.

Thread hijacking is welcome as long as things stay tenuously pre-grouping railway related. Brexit discussions, pro/anti Trump and one's religious convictions should be discussed in other places! Good point Kevin, I need to make the framework of that moveable trolley open so someone can crawl through it in extremis. The door opens outwards and I suppose if it were a medical emergency I'd care more about my welfare than a paramedic or neighbour shoving the trolley inwards and breaking some track and wires. Perspective is essential in these things. I had already intended to always have my mobile phone on me while I'm in there. If only I'd had a spare room and could have built the layout in the house. Would have saved much money and brain cells. The wheeled trolley section is only a plan at the moment. A lifting flap might be both easier and simpler, its just that a hinge above baseboard is needed for that and such and such scenic eyesore and so on, blah blah. Ian, yes, I agree, having very narrow sections to allow a peninsular and avoid duck-unders is always better but I think I've invested so much effort into planning now, as well as building stock and collecting other scenic items to work with the current plan that I think I must lie in the bed I've made. Not ideal but hey-ho, we'll see. I am sure you'll be proven right in the long term but hopefully that long term will allow me a couple of decades of happy use before joints begin to stiffen up.

Thanks. Now I know how I want to decorate the interior of my new railway room.

There's a spare bed if you need it and my lady friend does a cracking scrambled eggs on toast!

Hi Ian Yep, you're quite right, the duckunder between the two operating wells might become an issue as I get older. I am sitting and wondering about it. Apart from completely re-doing the plan I haven't come up with a good answer yet. There were some excellent ideas suggested by other people on here that I could raise the entire floor of the operating wells and make the duck-under more of a "step-downer" arrangement but limited ceiling height has made that a no-no unfortunately. I am building the baseboards at a height of 40" from the floor and in the duck-under area the two stations are at +7.5" and +3.5" above this datum so with appropriately designed boards I could get 3 more inches of clearance except for the cassette which is at datum. The ducking-under part could therefore be eased a little. The room entry is along the Borrocks station platforms and I intend to have that section on a separate trolley framework that can be wheeled out (the door opens outwards). With only 7.5 feet width within the garage after the wall insulation, studding and plasterboard went in, arranging an operating space where no internal duckunder was required proved a bit of a pain, with any sort of central island or peninsular baseboard design, which is what I wanted. Its why I went for two termini across the room to begin with. I couldn't fathom out how to fit a central peninsular style board without reducing the two baseboards on the outside of the walls to mere planks at that point. I freely admit the room needs to be at least 2 feet wider to be a truly useful space for this size of project but I had to live with what I had. It has caused me plenty of fingernail nibbling over the months. I can only hope I've made a decision I won't regret too quickly and that I get many ears of fun from it before my body complains too much. The cassette was the most recent operational addition and I'm not certain I need it. It is also handled by the person operating the exchange sidings (the set of sidings that are really a scenic fiddle yard below left of the quarry) so for that "fiddling" operator to keep asking the Great Shafting station operator to move aside so he can load or remove a train will be just... messy. The cassette may get scrapped. If my legs and/or back and/or any other vital parts give way in the years to come there is another option of cutting a separate access door into the right hand operating well on the top edge of the plan just to the left of Snarling Junction. This would be a messy and expensive option but is do-able if it proves necessary though I hope major surgery of this nature will be a couple of decades in the future. The two long tunnels under the pair of main termini will have open frames around them, and nets underneath to catch anything that falls off so when (not if!) something goes wrong under here I will have access to these tracks via the open framework. Also, finished this today. It now has to go for a trip to the weathering works. I'm feeling quite pleased with how this one turned out. It has a Britishness about it but is also reminiscent of bogie wagons that ran on the C&M and MVR and that's something I've been aiming to replicate as long as I didn't need to start using American box cars or anything like that.

Kevin - there is a team of helper elves, I refer you to page one where I rather reluctantly admitted this. I am having to pay them, unfortunately. Doing this on my own would take me the rest of my life, probably. I will insist on maximum input from me though, both decisions and actual modelling as I have so many ideas I'd like to put into practice here. Stu - correct, no complete circuit. A deliberate early decision. An operator must drive his train from somewhere to somewhere else and shunt it en-route. He (or she) must concentrate on what they are doing. I have had recent experience of a roundy-roundy railway where people's attention wandered and crashes were frequent. Not my thing. While a circuit is useful for running in, I can do that on a rolling road. Annie - thanks! I'm really stoked up about this, its the model railway I've always wanted and dreamed of and which rarely seems to be modelled. Usually with this much space people fill it with main lines which to be truthful do not actually interest me that much.

Perfect inspiration for one of my halts Annie - a neat little low dirt platform with wooden edging, a clapperboard hut, a lamp and a sign. Maybe a bench if the railway company is feeling generous. Its all you need out in the sticks.

I've been tweaking the plan a bit recently, mainly pencilling in a scenic treatment and giving myself an idea of where the ground levels are with embankment and cutting slopes. As mentioned before the WELR branch has now attained tramway status and photographs of the Wisbech & Upwell and the Wantage are providing inspiration. This would originally have been a horse drawn tramway, common in the Forest but converted to steam haulage around the 1880s as other needs of the local communities expanded. I wanted some form of interest around the curves at the colliery end without adding clutter and a track along a roadside came to me as something not that hard to model, not adding any more clutter to the layout at this end but adding a fair bit of character and interest. I have suggested a farm and inn complex on the open section of board just west/left of Snarling Junction which allowed me to sneak in another section of roadside tramway at the start of the branch. Following a comment on here about too much going on I have deleted the timber merchants business in the SE corner and converted this to a Crown timber siding which is more in keeping with Forest practices. There were several of these scattered about, timber being felled either for the war effort or pit props (not very likely), supplying cordwood to the wood distillation works or for general building trade. The siding is now much simpler with just a dirt platform faced with a sleeper-built timber edge and a stand of trees behind it. This facility also offers more traffic options than the timber merchants did - the idea of a timber merchant has also been done to death on a thousand layouts and this is something a little different. There's a few areas I'm still not happy with but plenty of time to juggle ideas. I'm not a fan of straight platforms and will twist both the termini a little to introduce curvature into them, again, just as a way to add interest.

I think the only improvement I can think of for the little diesel shunter is a bit of judicious grime. I have to say it reminds me very fondly of one of these:

I am trying to clear up a workbench full of part finished projects. For a while I have wanted to model all the rolling stock of my WELR branch line. There will be 24 vehicles. Nos.1 thru 4 : freelance 4-wheeled 1850s coaches; under construction. No.5 : freelance 4-wheeled passenger guards brake; almost complete. No.6 : GW prototype goods brake van, Pontenewedd type; complete No.7 : GW prototype 10 ton iron goods van; complete. Nos.8 & 9 : pair of Wisbech & Upwell coaches; kits built, awaiting painting. No.10 : GNSR prototype passenger guards brake; complete. No.11 : HR prototype open sheep wagon; kit awaiting construction. Nos.12 & 13 : GW prototype 4-plank open wagons; complete. Nos.14 thru 17 : GW prototype iron cattle wagons; complete. Nos.18 & 19 : HR prototype open sheep wagon; kits awaiting construction. No.20 : Wheeler & Gregory prototype 4-plank open wagon with curved ends; kit awaiting construction. No.21 : GW prototype 10 ton iron goods van; complete. No.22 : horse box; model to be sourced No.23 : GW prototype 10 ton wooden ventilated goods van; complete. No.24 : engineers dept 1.5 ton travelling crane wagon; kit awaiting construction. Today I finished 11, 12, 21 and 23 so the bulk of the basic goods vehicles are done. I've gone for very light weathering effects on these but the dirt doesn't show up well in the photographs.

Indeed. I spent a while yesterday evening musing over what "plunking up courage" might be like.

Thanks Lez, I appreciate the advice. I was going to just use the small luggage brake as a test piece. If all fails I can repaint it. I have a soft foam loco rest to start with and want to see if its a facet of modelling I want to get into before I invest too much effort in it.

I am getting to that annoying condition of having a dozen plus vehicles on the modelling bench in various states of progress and not actually finishing anything. I keep buying new shiny things and starting them. Must stop this Magpie style of modelling. Managed to get the gas tanker finished yesterday. Also a bit of a situation that was crushing my modelling mood (in fact all my moods except frustration and anger) was resolved yesterday, very much in my favour so I am now a happier bunny and several hundred pounds richer after someone paid up for something they initially argued against. The resolution has restored my mood, especially as the payment I received has effectively meant I got my new shed for free, plus a bit to spare. I am still staring at coaches and pondering on the concept of lining. I think I'll try the small freelance 4-wheel guards brake first as its so small and just try a couple of lines of yellow. I have a HMRS sheet of yellow lining transfers, I just have to pluck up the courage. EDIT: Typo - I spelled "pluck" as "plunk". Weird.

Taking out the huge electric motor in the boiler might help.

As far as I'm concerned it's by far the most interesting object in the picture! The very deep ash ballast is nice too but that has to come a poor second best! I think its quite easy to estimate the length of these vans as the sides all seemed to comprise a pair of X braced panels and two central doors. The X bracing always seems to be constructed on the same angle of intersection, or extremely close so the overall length cannot have varied by more than a few inches. Russell gives a 12 foot wheelbase and 18 foot OA, as well as, in his drawing, extremely long, slender coach style buffers. I don't think I've seen buffers quite that long and slender on anything else.

I think Kevin is on target when he says they were built on a variety of redundant coach chassis as the other models I have seen had Maunsell wheels and clasp brakes, though this may have been a modification when they were given vac brakes.