Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,972 Posts
Looks very neat, efficiently 'packing in' as much run as possible in the space.

I have a plan for my 'duck-under' as I get older. Got me an old wheelchair so I can ride under when bending becomes a challenge. Much
simpler than any lift out section. Old wheelchairs are chucked out quite regularly, the one I have 'had to go' because it had no locking
wheel brakes.
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,972 Posts
I like the track gently snaking through the platforms. You do know that these bullhead points can flex a little without any modification
'as they come out of the packet'? I haven't permanently laid any of mine yet, but having gently curved plenty of code 100 and 75
Streamline large radius points over the years and not a single problem, I will go on to do the same with the Bullhead. (I have a scale
half mile radius curve through my 'station that is to come' into which the points will fit seamlessly by this means.)

QUOTE (Robert Stokes @ 20 Dec 2019, 22:07) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...I believe that medium radius points are on the drawing board but when they will be available is anyone's guess...
I have to believe that Peco are working at whatever may be their full capacity to expand the range of points; because my local model
railway shop owner tells me the sales of the BH track have way exceeded expectations. Of course they may be getting hung up on the
slips: these will be a problem is my feeling because of their small radius. (In my ideal world Peco would have abandoned Streamline
geometry, and gone for prototype representation. I have a very neat double slip from Marcway based on five chains radius. Not
outrageously large, an item I need for Hatfield East side yard.)

QUOTE (Robert Stokes @ 20 Dec 2019, 22:07) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...A shed 7.2m by 2.4m it says in another thread! I'm envious. A pity that the width is not quite enough for O gauge...
Then again, even 3.1 x 10.2 metres isn't sufficient for dreams of world domination. O gauge would fit, but not therequirement for a
pacific pounding away with 12 or more on, sigh. Our fundamental problem, the real railway sprawls...
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,972 Posts
QUOTE (Robert Stokes @ 23 Feb 2021, 15:54) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>...I realised that a main line descending into a tunnel was unrealistic...
Not necessarily. The GNR main line descends steadily into the Thames valley on the last 20 miles approaching Kings Cross, but has several tunnels, as it encounters the remnants of escarpments at near right angles to its route. These weren't quite the landforms the Midland encountered in its Pennine adventure, admitted...
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,972 Posts
Like the lighting over the 'castle corner', very reminiscent of walking the Pennine Way in a long ago summer. Much cloud and heavy rain, but when the sun broke through there were powerful 'spot lighting' effects, sweeping across the uplands; and you have it right there!

To echo others, that's looking very fine indeed altogether.
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,972 Posts
View attachment 20202

This is not quite finished as the left-hand wall needs its capping stones. The position of the rear plate girder bridge is an attempt at a con trick. I want to give the impression that the lower track runs straight on whereas it really turns sharply to the right. This con trick may not come off very well...
I feel the effect will be improved if you have dense vegetation near completely obscuring the view under the girder bridge, then there is less information about the continuing direction of the double track line. The blend to the 'distant' back scene is good, and should add to the perception that the line runs off into the distance.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top