Help! I could do with some advice.

Nick Rogers

Western Thunderer
Well, I thought it was about time to post something, as it has been far too long.

As many of you know, last summer, we lost Brian Pearce to cancer. Brian and I developed a very close bond over the 16 years I knew him, and to say his death hit me hard would be putting it mildly. My modelling mojo evaporated last year, and I'm still struggling to get back into some form of railway modelling routine. I have been busy contributing to the construction of DRAG's latest test track, TT3, and that has absorbed a lot of my free time. In some respects, it has helped, but in other ways, it hasn't - I haven't been able to get on with my own stuff during these sessions.

Brian had been assisting me with the construction of a layout, Peter Tavy, a mixture of Coryton and Dousland on the respective Launceston and Princetown branches, back in 2022. The plan was for this to be my first P4 layout. It's about 7 ft by 2 ft and would require two 3ft fiddle yards. However, it could have done with being another 1ft longer, so we paused construction while we got on with TT3's work. The revised plan was to use the scenic boards as fiddle yards and rebuild the scenic boards. The plan was inspired by one of Iain Rice's, and we found the planned point work geometry was a tad tight for P4.

Peter Tavy.jpg

IMG_6193.jpg
Early baseboard work. The remnants of the late Nigel Hunt's empire lurk in the background, along with a Tim Horn curved board for TT3.

IMG_6237.jpg
Stock testing: the track was a mixture of recovered stuff, most of which wouldn't be used, but it was to give a flavour of what it might look like. A 45xx with a two-coach set or six wagons plus a brake van would be about the limit. Brian and I both felt that less would be more with this project. A core fleet of 6-7 locomotives and six trains would be more than enough to get things moving. At the time, I had about half the required stock. Now, I have almost enough to complete a reasonable sequence of trains if I dusted this project down and reserected it.

IMG_6242.jpg


Really, it could do with another 6 inches at either end to help with the flow. The tops haven't been fixed, as the landscaping needs to be finalised. The board fronts did have a cut-away section to enable the embankment and river to be modelled.

I've also moved house, which required far more renovation work than I thought (when does it not!?). I now have a proper dedicated modelling space. I am planning to convert my garage into a workshop and have longer-term plans for a home office in the garden to house a layout. Whispers of Launceston, Horrabridge and Tavistock can be heard drifting and echoing about the place! These whispers do grow louder, which is a good sign.

As TT3 is nearing completion, my thoughts have been turning more and more towards my modelling again. I feel I'm currently at a bit of a crossroads regarding what I actually get on with over the coming months. I would like to get on with a layout, but really, the garden office/studio will have to be kicked into the grass until next year as I know I don't have the time or resources currently to do this (the garden will need some quite serious work before this can be entertained).

My modelling room is 12ft by 8ft, so there is some potential for a cameo layout to go in there. Possibly a terminus or small through station set up. I also have the garage, which is 16ft x 8ft. As I said earlier, my plan is to convert this into a workshop. It won't be a full-blown room conversion, as I'd like to retain it as a garage, but better insulation, boarding of the loft space to provide additional storage, lighting and the fitting of more suitable doors will make it a much more usable space. However, I do have a lot of workshop equipment (workbench, tablesaw, pillar drill, tools, lathes, etc), which will require a significant chunk of space, so really, only an L shape is feasible for a layout. Essentially, if a small scheme didn't quite fit in the modelling room, it could be housed down there and boards brought indoors into the modelling room to work on.

Indeed, the inspiration for the workshop/layout room has come from another good friend, Maurice Hopper (the workbench in the photos I've been lucky enough to purchase as Maurice downsizes his set up). In the series of photos below, I believe only Nancarrow Junction and Tresparret Maurice plans to continue. It is a shame that the full LSWR scheme won't be realised; nonetheless, I do understand why. Space!

Cameo set up along the L:

IMG_2859.JPG
The Quay (3 ft by 1 ft Tim Horn fishtank board, with additional add-ons).

IMG_2858.JPG
The plan was for inset-track amongst cobbles.

IMG_2857.JPG
In true Hopper style, both wagon turntables worked (the handle being located next to the small lever frame). A Beattie Well tank would patrol the quay. Its short wheelbase is perfect for the cramped Victorian trackwork.

IMG_3686.JPG
I believe the 'token' enabled it all to work - this can be seen fitted above the white pad (it isn't present in the other photo). This photo also shows the turntable off to good effect.

IMG_3689.JPG
Turntable fiddle-yard in the corner.

IMG_3687.JPG
Nancarrow Junction and Exchange Sidings

IMG_3688.JPG
Tresparrett Wharf (I've operated this part of the layout several times and thoroughly enjoyed its simplicity).

More tradition end-to-end layout: Melstock under construction. Melstock was based on Colyton.
IMG_8094.jpg

Maurice's superb workbench, now transferred over to Brinkley Hall, on the opposite side of Maurice's workshop:
IMG_8090.jpg
 

Nick Rogers

Western Thunderer
The North Cornwall concept in the previous post - almost an American Thin Branch - has given me lots of food for thought, as an individual cameo layout could be operated in the railway room, and then additional schemes developed and operated together, or as individual modules, as Maurice initially planned to do. Potentially, 16ft of Horrabridge's 19ft could also be up in the workshop or 8ft in the railway room. However, I wouldn't be able to operate it in either space in its current format as it's a tad big. For my own sanity, I think I need some form of layout to play with! So I have options and a lot more space than a lot of people have.

This is where the crossroads really start to occur. Ultimately, I want to build Horrabridge. I've been planning it and talking about it for almost 14 years. Various things have happened, and there have been lots of false starts, but I can now start to visualise it happening. A large part of me feels that I should focus on that as an end goal. But, and it is a big but, I haven't built my own finescale layout. I have no experience with scenic work. Almost none with plastic building construction. Limited chassis and locomotive building experience (which is something I really want to get into). Quite limited track-building skills, too. So, I feel I need to do something as a test piece first before leaping into a big project. I am 75% certain Horrabridge will be built to P4 standards as I have all the necessary bits to do it and a lot of stock already in P4.

And this is where the crisis really unfolds. For a long time, I have been plodding away, building stock to P4 standards. I enjoy working to P4 standards. I can get rolling stock to perform very well on TT2. It also runs very smoothly on various friends' P4 layouts (Dulverton and Marsh Sidings being two that spring to mind). I have a significant amount of freight stock. A fair number of ex-GWR locomotives and some Western Region coaching stock are all good to go in P4 (some things need cosmetic completion, but they run well). Brian very kindly left me a lot of his stock built to P4 standards: Southern Railway locomotives, coaches and freight stock. Enough to populate a small layout.

But... I also have a reasonable amount of RTR 00 stock (motive and rolling stock), which could form the core of a future finescale 00 layout project.

Part of me (a large part) is saying cut your teeth on an 00 project. A lot of the skills (well, almost all of them) are transferable, and let's be totally honest: working in 00 is far easier than P4. Markits wheels make 00 chassis building much easier (I know they are tricky to get, but I have got a fair number of them in stock). RTR stock doesn't need converting, meaning I can focus on other things. Peco produce bullhead trackwork if I wanted to use that. Common crossings, blades, chairs and sleepers are all obtainable if I opt for hand-built track (which is probably the way I would go).

But, there is this nagging feeling in me saying wrong way. Another voice is saying Pick a horse. Pick a race. Run it! Why duplicate stock? I could go down the route of having a small 00 project, which is completely different to Horrabridge, say the Teign Valley line (lots of potential fun with that idea!), but I'm struggling with it as I'm interested but not passionate about it. And that, I think, is the key issue. I don't want to embark on a project and be lukewarm about it, as I doubt I will complete it based on past experience.

Interested or passionate? My own modelling interests are reasonably clear-cut. I like the GWR on Dartmoor; Southern lines West of Exeter (including the Camel Valley, Bodmin and Wadebridge, and the bits in and around Plymouth); and the GWR mainline Penzance to Exeter. Passions are GWR on Dartmoor, along with the GWR Mainline (particularly Hemerdon Loops and Ivybridge) and the LSWR/GWR in the Camel Valley. Interests are the SR West of Exeter.

I enjoy operating layouts. I don't mind a bit of shunting. I prefer a layout in the landscape and, over the past couple of years, have found I really find junction stations interesting as you have the best of both worlds (through-station and branch line terminus). I don't mind a bit of urban grott, but England's green and pleasant lands are more my cup of tea!

I could do something based on the Camel Valley. I am genuinely interested and quite passionate about the railways in that area (both Western and Southern). Indeed, look at the photos above. Maurice really captured my imagination with his scheme. What puts me off building an 00 Camel Valley cameo layout is the poor performance (in my experience) of the Beattie Well and O2 tanks. I think I would become irritated with the performance of the stock. I also have in P4 an O2, 45xxs, and various panniers, which makes me think it might be more sensible to go down the P4 route with that scheme.

I do find myself circling about and naturally gravitating back to BR Western Region, or GWR. But I don't want to end up with two sets of stock for Horrabridge (one in 00 and one set in P4)!

So I really am open to ideas and suggestions! Ladies and gentlemen, the floor is yours! Help!! What the hell do I do? I don't think any of this muddle is helping my modelling mindset. I like a plan, but there isn't one currently!

- Do I stick to the overall scheme, which is Horrabridge, dig out Peter Tavy, and crack on it in P4 and see if I can do it? (I believe I can.) This sticks to the overall 'Pick a Horse. Pick a Race. Run it!' mindset, which I think is quite important if I'm actually going to get something done. I have also thought of using the 44xx and doing something on the Princetown branch - a series of cameo layouts based on locations on the branch. Small, contained, very limited stock requirements... Very much less is more and copy what Geoff has done with his 7mm modelling. Really home in on a couple of locos and set the scene. Similar to Maurice's LSWR empire. I am passionate about the Launceston branch and love Dartmoor.

- Do I go down the route of something in 00, GWR or BR WR in nature but not linked to Horrabridge? Park Peter Tavy for now and produce something small, which is purely a test-piece/learning ground? As I mentioned before, I've been looking at the Teign Valley, and there are a few things to inspire smaller projects. Essentially, build a Teign Valley exchange layout where I can shuffle stock between two lines (similar to Boscarne). I'm also interested in the GWR in Wales Llangollen line being a route I've been interested in since a family holiday there 25 years ago. I do have to check myself a bit, as I'm interested and not passionate about this and don't want to embark on something that isn't going to keep me interested.

- Should I go for an even greater curved ball idea and do something Southern/Western in either 00 or P4 and just add stock to what I already have? An adaption of Boscarne Junction is quite appealing, and in P4, all I lack is a Well Tank or two (see list of stock below). I have spare Bachmann bodies in GWR livery, which would suit Brian's pre-nationalised Southern Stock. I could built SEF kit for an O2 and scratch-build a chassis for the Well Tank using Gibson frames. This certainly interests me more than Teign Valley. I like the exchange between SR and WR and the mixture of stock. It also can be done with a limited pallet - O2, BTW, 45xx, 57xx. It is achievable and simple in both gauges.

In 00, I have numerous 45/4575, 57xx, and 64xx in GWR livery. Various bodies (14xx, moguls, Collett Goods and so on), chassis kits, Markits wheels and Mashima motors to hand suitable for 57xx, 45xx, 14xx, 43xx and others. Plus, there is some GWR coaching and freight stock (mostly RTR in boxes).

I also have some ex-LSWR RTR stock in 00: Well tanks, M7s, T9s, N-Class, and a range of Hornby Maunsell coaching stock.

In P4, in BR era, I have:
One 44xx (built and painted professionally) runs like a Swiss watch
Four 45/4575 locomotives (one kit and three Bachmann conversions)
Numerous 57xx panniers (two with kit-built chassis, three RTR converted)
Two part-built moguls (one Bachmann/Whitebourne and one Mitchell - both bought in part-built condition)
One part-built 14xx, which probably is a non-starter and will be stripped for parts.
Several WR coaching stock sets.
One Bulleid 4-coach set (the new coaches with turned wheels).
Lots of freight stock and brake vans

One O2, T1, E2, pair of Terriers, Mogul and other bits in various stages of construction (built by Brian). Four Maunsell coaching stock sets, a Bulleid pair, an ex LSWR two-coach set (needs finishing) and various bits of freight stock. All of this stock is in pre-nationalised livery.

If you have made it this far, well done! I congratulate you! What I could do is some advice and thoughts on what other people have done. I surely can't be the only one in this boat!? Or am I...? :)) If anyone has any bright ideas, inspiration or layout schemes, or even tablets, please do share them!

In egar anticipation!

Best wishes,

Nick.
 
Last edited:

Paul Cram

Western Thunderer
The question you need to answer is would you be happy with the appearance of OO track?

I am a P4 modeller and have friends who have oo layouts which I have helped with. I can't get enthusiastic about them as I think the track looks rubbush. i also can't enthusiastic about ready to run midels no matter how good they are.
 

ullypug

Western Thunderer
Nick
I remember the dilemma well. I had something similar years ago before I started. I eventually picked an obscure light railway in EM before trying P4 too.
Don’t doubt your ability. We’ve seen what you can do and it’s good. You’d have no trouble in a P4 layout. It’s an itch you need to scratch and I think you’ll regret it if you don’t. Like many of us who are still working, your problem it time. It’s a fixed commodity and has to be used wisely.
So why don’t you start with a simple test track/inglenook (or a bit of Peter Tavy) that you can have at home. Nothing massive, but something you can use to see if you can build an engine or two before you commit to investing time in layout building. You have an engine you know works, so it’s a case of stepping stones.
The engine works, so the track should work. When it does, the next engine should also work. It’s a case of steps forward from a known reference point of success.
Horrabridge, Peter Tavy or anything else could come from that point on.
And if for any reason you can’t get P4 to work (which I doubt), you can revert to 00 or even EM.
You’ve enough friends in the DRAG group and elsewhere to call on if you need to.
Sorry if this sounds like a condescending motivational presentation!!
Just start and enjoy the journey.

And btw, years ago I drylined my garage and insulated the roof and garage door with Kingspan. I put a few 60w greenhouse tubular heaters in there and it was fine for years.
 

simond

Western Thunderer
Yes but.

Same is true in 7mm

and it is undoubtedly possible to have an atmospheric, satisfying model in coarse scale too.

My thoughts, for what they are worth, are to choose a theme, scale, standard, era, and stick to it. You might want to change after a period of time, but that can be years. I’ve been doing 0 gauge GW for 28 or 29 years and am not yet bored. Previously, I enjoyed 16mm NG for maybe ten years.

Of course, whilst it works for me, it might not float your boat.
 

Tim Lewis

Member
Go for "passionate" rather than "interested" or even "quite passionate". If you don't, you will regret it further down the line: you will always be thinking "Well, this is nice, but I wish I'd gone for Horrabridge in P4". Seems like you could use Peter Tavy as a test bed of sorts, with the possible aim of linking it to Horrabridge later? Would it be possible for Peter Tavy to be "dual purpose"? - linked to Horrabridge as part of your BR/WR scheme, but with the option to separate it and use it as somewhere to run Brian's SR stock?

Remember also that, whatever you do, it WILL take longer than you think - another good reason to go for the "main prize" without any interim distractions.

HTH, and good luck with it.
 

Ian@StEnochs

Western Thunderer
Remember the impressionist painters, the further away you stand the better the picture. However get close and all you see are daubs of paint.

A model, built to the finest standards, will look good close up but still fit into an atmospheric scene. Even coarse scale tinplate trains can look realistic just don’t get too near as the realism fades.

Ian
 

Nick Rogers

Western Thunderer
First of all, thank you for all the replies. It has really helped get a bit of a plan thrashed out in my head. I'll reply to messages as I go along.

The question you need to answer is would you be happy with the appearance of OO track?

I am a P4 modeller and have friends who have oo layouts which I have helped with. I can't get enthusiastic about them as I think the track looks rubbush. i also can't enthusiastic about ready to run midels no matter how good they are.
Honest answer, Paul. I'm not sure. I think this has been the issue since coming across P4 back in 2008 - dratted CK to blame for that! I think if I built the track using Exactoscale and C&L parts, probably not. I like the finer detail of the keys in the chairs (I know Peco does provide keys on their chaired bullhead track now), the look of common crossings and essentially the 'finer' look of it if built well.

As many know, I work as a guard for GWR, so I spend my day looking at trackwork, and the appearance of it, I feel in model form, is quite important. So this is one of the appeals of P4 - the 'true' look. The wheel flanges also play a part, I must confess. Corse flanges do nothing for me.

The distance between the rails is relatively inconsequential as can be seen on Old Parrock, anything by that awfully nice Sheepbloke and many others showcased here on WT and elswhere.
This argument is very valid, and I have thought about layout height a lot. Old Parrock is a very good example of what can be achieved with Peco bullhead. Tim has made a lovely job of the trackwork on Bethesda, and I'm operating it on Sunday, so I think this will be a really good barometer in many respects.
 

Nick Rogers

Western Thunderer
Nick
I remember the dilemma well. I had something similar years ago before I started. I eventually picked an obscure light railway in EM before trying P4 too.
Don’t doubt your ability. We’ve seen what you can do and it’s good. You’d have no trouble in a P4 layout. It’s an itch you need to scratch and I think you’ll regret it if you don’t. Like many of us who are still working, your problem it time. It’s a fixed commodity and has to be used wisely.
So why don’t you start with a simple test track/inglenook (or a bit of Peter Tavy) that you can have at home. Nothing massive, but something you can use to see if you can build an engine or two before you commit to investing time in layout building. You have an engine you know works, so it’s a case of stepping stones.
The engine works, so the track should work. When it does, the next engine should also work. It’s a case of steps forward from a known reference point of success.
Horrabridge, Peter Tavy or anything else could come from that point on.
And if for any reason you can’t get P4 to work (which I doubt), you can revert to 00 or even EM.
You’ve enough friends in the DRAG group and elsewhere to call on if you need to.
Sorry if this sounds like a condescending motivational presentation!!
Just start and enjoy the journey.

And btw, years ago I drylined my garage and insulated the roof and garage door with Kingspan. I put a few 60w greenhouse tubular heaters in there and it was fine for years.

I'm glad I'm not the only one, Andrew!

Your post contains a lot of food for thought. Time is definitely a big factor, which goes back to the horse race analogy. I think working towards a common outcome isn't a bad thing at all. But I do think something small and simple is the right way to go currently. I do have a couple of ideas in mind, which would utilise what I have already got in P4 (or 00 for that matter).

And it certainly isn't condescending! I really value what everyone has said, as I was/am in a bit of a muddle currently.
 

Nick Rogers

Western Thunderer
Go for "passionate" rather than "interested" or even "quite passionate". If you don't, you will regret it further down the line: you will always be thinking "Well, this is nice, but I wish I'd gone for Horrabridge in P4". Seems like you could use Peter Tavy as a test bed of sorts, with the possible aim of linking it to Horrabridge later? Would it be possible for Peter Tavy to be "dual purpose"? - linked to Horrabridge as part of your BR/WR scheme, but with the option to separate it and use it as somewhere to run Brian's SR stock?

Remember also that, whatever you do, it WILL take longer than you think - another good reason to go for the "main prize" without any interim distractions.

HTH, and good luck with it.

Hello Tim,

So, the idea behind Peter Tavy was that it took the place of Mary Tavy on the Launceston branch, which was beyond Tavistock. Only half the passenger services ran beyond Tavistock, so the stock requirement is genuinely far less than what Horrabridge needs (Horrabridge being south of Tavistock and everything ran through there). I should have put that in the opening post, as you have pretty much hit the nail on the head with the original idea.

During the war, there were numerous SR and GWR workings over each others system in that area, and it certainly wouldn't be implausible to run Southern stock on the branch, as it did happen during the war, and until the coaching stock situation was resolved at Laira, with a load of Hawksworth autocoaches being cascaded down from Wales in the mid-1950s, Southern stock was certainly 'borrowed' and ran on the line.

This was a big part of choosing this idea, as it continued to feed into the larger scheme. All the stock would be suitable for Horrabridge. Horrabridge is a copy, well near a copy, of the original station. Peter Tavy was a freelance idea but based on two other stations on the line.

Sleeping on all this last night has made me think that sticking with Horrabridge as the end goal is definitely the right thing to do. A small shunting plank, or siding, is something I would definitely consider, as I could base that on anything.

Regards,
 

Nick Rogers

Western Thunderer
Remember the impressionist painters, the further away you stand the better the picture. However get close and all you see are daubs of paint.

A model, built to the finest standards, will look good close up but still fit into an atmospheric scene. Even coarse scale tinplate trains can look realistic just don’t get too near as the realism fades.

Ian

Very sound advice, Ian. I do think some of my ideas have been based on the glare of the digital camera!
 
Top