What do you use ?

Ludgershall station was originally built with just 300 ft platforms,  around 1905, they were lengthened for the military.  So the civilian side of the station  had nearly 900ft of platforms plus an additional bay platform.  Then there was a bridge,  a junction for the Tidworth branch with the space between branch and mainline filled with goods yard and nearly another 1000ft of platforms purely for the military.  Hence the long length of the station. 
Permission was granted for the shed as one end was built semi circular as an art studio for SWMBO.  Below the layout for half the shed is her art storage,  above the windows are her art books.

The other end is the model railway workshop area. Each board will be built to be removed back to the workshop. So the boards sit on a vast table of a shape matching Ludgershall station.  On its return down the other side,  will be Collingbourne station only 2ft wide but 18ft long with sidings. Convienently Collingbourne platforms are just 300ft long,  which fitted neatly on a 4ft board,  which has been completed in white,  IE Landscaped only. 

At that point I inherited the N gauge layout here… Login 
So Since then work has concentrated on that layout, I've only exhibited that at our club open day as a work in progress.  
As for this week thoughts are with our show,  on Thursday I drive from Scotland to Norfolk,  on Friday by lunch time I'll be at the MRC loading up,  then we drive to Aylsham,  move 100+chairs and a stage, set up for our show. By 18:00 some layouts and traders will  arrive. At 07:00 well be back at the hall saturday morning. Getting the majority of layouts in.  Opening at 10:00 after stewarding for the day,  then we get all the traders and layouts out clean the floors. Relay the chairs and stage ready for the church service in the morning.  Then drive back to catfield unload everything back into the club house.  And head for home… 

2019 Exhibtion – Broadland Model Railway Club

Quiet relaxing weekend then. 

Nigel

Late to this as usual…Small tension locks for me on OO, a small strip of stiff clear acrylic sheet which can be 'sprung' between two appropriately spaced sleepers serves as an unobtrusive uncoupling ramp. This has the advantage of being able to be moved about until the most effective place to site it is found. It doesn't get round the  uncoupled push facility of some systems, but two or even three 5/16" wide by 1-1/2" long strips of acrylic are easilt overlooked on a longish siding. On Bear's End I found they lost their springiness after about 6 months but are simply replaced.

Douglas

Well our show went well,  however I got persuaded to run a layout while the owner was lunch… It was a three link coupled 4 mm scale  shunting layout…arrgghhhIt looks good but a nightmare to operate at a show… And I think the hand of God going over the top destroys any illusion. 

I couldn't agree more Q.

In days of yore, I always thought 3 link couplings at shows were terrible.  They obviously look fantastic - thoroughly authentic but that great hand from above, with a rod (often with a light on the end) and bent pin totally destroys the illusion. 

Additionally, one of my pet hates is that back and forth shuffling of wagons within a train - it's terrible with 3 link couplings.  It highlights the fact that a) they're very light,  b), they're empty and c) the loco has a somewhat jerky pull.  Maybe many only have lumpy 2 pole motors installed, dirty wheels or less than smooth power output.    Some kind of resistance on one axle on every wagon/coach would, I think, easily stop it.  It's less noticable with TL couplings but it's still there and it still annoys me.

Horses for courses. 

A totally realistic scale model will have 3 link, instanter or screw link couplers. and shunters with working arms and legs. Or if modern some variation of a knuckle coupler. Working models that involve shunting will have a representative coupler. Or over-scale hand's and poles.That's in HO or OO. Gets worse in N, better in O.


As for loose coupled wagons banging around? That's what they did on the prototype when shunting, starting or stopping. Another compromise related to the sharp point radius we use in our usually far from scale layouts. Q is just about there with a six-foot radius. Anything else is an issue as spring buffers will lock once opposing heads slide off each other.


Ease of use and minimal or no work for UK stock? TL's. Magnetic uncoupling? KD's.  They also give a representation of vacuum or air pipes (hands up, who models working pipes? They are available). Anything else is fiddly and still a compromise.


Best couplers I saw in operation were on a rake of LMS passenger coaches that John (Brossard) had running a few years ago. Hard brass wire parallel bar "loop" on one coach end, small right angle down hook in the middle of the end of it's opposite. Close coupled, gangways in place (hands up, who has working gangways? Passengers - please mind the 10 foot gap!), they were not noticeable unless you were told. 


While I am on a roll here, for the GWR folks, how many of us model that rigid bar connector along with the buffer beams between those close coupled B-sets? Or that Cardan shaft between an autocar and the engine that provided the regulator linkage? 


Where I live decoupling from the sky is taken as normal. Compromise is normal in this hobby. And especially so in under-gauge OO. I compromise with EM as it means most RTR stock is easily modified. Or as it turns out sometimess, not. Or maybe, we don't know (recent response from a UK model locomotive supplier currently at the CAD stage of a forthcoming release. I recon for £150 plus sound decoder they should. I digress).


YMR. Rule 1. Use what works for you. Model: a three dimensional representation, usually on a smaller scale. 


Nigel

Late to the party Peter….but here is my two pennies worth.
I really wanted hands off shunting, coupling and uncoupling.  So I have gone with Kadees for freight stock.  I don't have a lot yet, but will convert what I do have and all new stock.  I did plan where under track magnets would go….. but then  when actually running a practice session or 5, discovered I wanted a couple more options.  The much documented 5 square magnets worked perfectly (once I had worked out polarity issues) and are pretty much unnoticeable (as opposed to invisible).

My passenger stock will be pretty much set up as fixed rakes, I won't be changing them around.  For now I will keep TLs for them….. although I have seen magnetic couplings that look quite interesting.

To me it seems sensible to choose the coupling for what you want to achieve - be that function, aesthetics or reliability.

Regards

Michael

Thanks for your input Michael.   :thumbs

Interesting that the "5 square magnets" worked well for you.  I presume you're talking about the neodymium magnets placed between the rails ………… :roll: :roll:

My initial thoughts were to adopt that system but then I read all sorts of conflicting reports about problems associated with the metal axles on UK rolling stock, some even suggesting changing the wheelsets for non-magnetic US versions.

I assume you run "normal" UK outline stock and if so,  have you experienced any such problems - particularly where you have the rare-earth magnets installed ?

Hi Peter - you are right in your assumptions.  
I only  really experienced a problem if wagons were light in weight.  However, a small piece of sponge between the axle and the bottom of the wagon, acting as a sort of brake solved it simply and it isn't visible so it isn't a problem.  Heavier wagons haven't, so far, been a problem.

Regards

Michael

Thanks Michael - I'll continue swapping my TL's for Kadees in that case.  :thumbs

Hi all
Having used 3-link when I could see things without glasses and now TLs, I have to admit that the hands-on shunting pole brings me closer to the operation - I become the shunter as it were

I do understand the hands-off approach and the better looks of KDs but the hands-on allows me to accept the "hand from the sky" compromise

As has been said, Rule 1 applies

Barry