Omagh GNRi station

[David Holman]

Has the makings of a very cosy man cave, Tony.

[GNRi1959]

Has the makings of a very cosy man cave, Tony.

 

Indeed, blockwork completed today before rain started. Hopefully, the shed will be ready in 4-5weeks as promised.

[Junctionmad]

Consideration could be given to modelling 21mm to EM flangeway standards, this would allow radius down to about 2'10 and hence could get round in a 6' shed, it also removes the need to compensate locos and wagons , EM has 1mm flangeways as opposed to 0.68mm for p4. 00 style wheel set on longer axles can then be used and trackwork is a little more forgiving

 

 

Visually, you then have 21mm but running models is a little easier and less precise

 

You'd need custom track gauges, but that's not that difficult to make etc

Edited September 9, 2017 by Junctionmad

[Andy Cundick]

I build all my 21mm stock to EM standards a couple of the locos are compensated but the majority are fixed as are all the coaches and wagons,the main benefit of using 21 is visual with the best will in the world irish viewde end on looks odd.Andy.

[Mayner]

I have been messing around in 21mm gauge for over 20 years to EM standards though I have yet to build a successful layout mainly due to the lack of suitable space to build a layout. I started building an 8'X6' shunting layout a few years ago but gave up because because of side-swipe between coaches as I did not allow enough space between lines on curves, min radius curve was 3'.

 

Track and back to back gauges were sourced from TMD models (the precursor of SSM) many years ago. At one stage SSM also produced 28mm W Irons for 21mm gauge stock and single lever IRCH brake gear used by the GNR and the Southern companies. 21mm loco & wagon/coach wheel sets were sourced from Ultrascale (Gear Services Letchworth) or by cutting and sleeving standard 26mm OO/EM gauge axles with 2mm bore brass tube, more recently I have used locally sourced 28mm Sn3.5 axles from Northyard Models.

 

Ultrascale though expensive is probably the best option in terms of quality, though steam loco driving wheels are largely restricted to GWR types and there is a 3 month lead time between placing and filling an order.

 

 

Alan Gibson produces a large range of wheels and components including brass wire, handrail knobs, bearings, though availability is somewhat patchy. High Level Models produce a range of gearbpxes which have become the de-facto standard for 4mm kit and scratch built locos.

 

If you are going down the road of modelling the Omagh in the 1950s or 60s there is no real alternative to scratch or kit building every item of rolling stock. If you choose to use Murphy Models Irish coaches or other rtr OO gauge stock you will need to widen or replace the bogies/underframes as they are too narrow for 21mm gauge wheelsets.

 

Murphy Models 141 with SSM Bredin Coaches

Dapol & Parkside wagons with widened underframes

I did not allow enough clearance between running lines and sidings which lead to side swiping between coaches on curved track

 

​CIE Palvan modified from Parkside BR van by moving out solebars and modifying doors

[GNRi1959]

Hi John, your comments are welcome.

Your opening lines were enough to get me thinking...... "I have been messing around in 21mm gauge for over 20 years to EM standards though I have yet to build a successful layout mainly due to the lack of suitable space to build a layout." There seem to be many issues with 21mm, all of which compound the modeller with problem after problem. I am sure that 21mm is possible, on a budget, with a lot of skill and patience.Thats why I'm throwing this thread out there because its good to hear of the experiences of others. They are valued, thanks.

[Andy Cundick]

Bear i mind that you don't need a lot to get started thats why Valencia Harbour was built only 3 points all the stock needed to run it apart from a brake van is available.Its always a good idea to start small .Andy

[RichL]

I wonder why people insist on using 21mm gauge with EM wheelsets. EM wheels are noticeably wider than prototype so if you use them, the distance over the wheel faces is overlarge. That means loco splashers,valve gear, w-irons, bogies and other stuff often have to be wider than prototype, which looks as wrong as the wrong gauge. Better to model an EM version of 21mm gauge, which would be 20mm or slightly more, depending on how precise you want to be.

 

Everyone seems to focus on the gauge as being sacrosanct, but in reality I think you need to balance gauge against other factors to get the best balance.

[GNRi1959]

Bear i mind that you don't need a lot to get started thats why Valencia Harbour was built only 3 points all the stock needed to run it apart from a brake van is available.Its always a good idea to start small .Andy

 

I plan on modelling various aspects of Omagh that are part of the landscape I grew up around. I hope to model the Goods Yard which has at least six points and the line that runs to the Engine Shed and turntable. The layout won't be geographically correct but will involve modelling both locations precisely and bringing them together with some modellers licence.

[Mayner]

I wonder why people insist on using 21mm gauge with EM wheelsets. EM wheels are noticeably wider than prototype so if you use them, the distance over the wheel faces is overlarge. That means loco splashers,valve gear, w-irons, bogies and other stuff often have to be wider than prototype, which looks as wrong as the wrong gauge. Better to model an EM version of 21mm gauge, which would be 20mm or slightly more, depending on how precise you want to be.

 

Everyone seems to focus on the gauge as being sacrosanct, but in reality I think you need to balance gauge against other factors to get the best balance.

 

In practice using EM gauge wheel sets in 21mm gauge does not have a significant distorting effect on the width of 21mm gauge locos and rolling stock. The overall wheels set width is 0.06 mm wider or ¾" in full size terms using EM rather than S4 wheel sets.

 

The wider 2.28-2.3mm tyre width is largely offset by the narrower back to back gauge of 19.5mm used with modern plastic centered Gibson and Ultrascale wheels, some modelers use "standard" Jackson, Hornby, Bachmann wheels with a back to back of 19.3mm. The looser running tolerance using EM/OO standards is more forgiving in terms of workmanship building trackwork and rolling stock and to run locos and stock round smaller radius curves than feasible in S4

 

Its important to consider that its not always practicable to scale down running clearances between driving wheels and splashers and between rods in valve gear and that it may be necessary to increase clearances even in S4 standards.

SSM locos have been built to 21mm gauge to EM standards by a number of modellers including several J15, S Class 4-4-0s and a number of SG 0-6-0s without significant modification, though it is important to check that there is sufficient clearance behind valance and splashers regardless of whether a loco is being built to 21mm or S4 standards

Edited September 11, 2017 by Mayner

[Mayner]

Hi John, your comments are welcome.

Your opening lines were enough to get me thinking...... "I have been messing around in 21mm gauge for over 20 years to EM standards though I have yet to build a successful layout mainly due to the lack of suitable space to build a layout." There seem to be many issues with 21mm, all of which compound the modeller with problem after problem. I am sure that 21mm is possible, on a budget, with a lot of skill and patience.Thats why I'm throwing this thread out there because its good to hear of the experiences of others. They are valued, thanks.

 

My failure to get to grips with building a 21mm gauge layout in 20 years is more to do with external factors and personality than the challenges of scratch and kit building in 21mm gauge. Although my primary modelling interest is the Irish broad gauge I have tended to focus more on building locos and stock in 4mm to 5'3" and the 3' gauge than building a layout as until recently I did not have a suitable space.

 

I have a shortish span of attention and tend to have flirtations in various scales and gauges and over the past 30 years built American N & G Scale, an Irish 3' shelf layout and an EM gauge industrial layout. Apart from the N Gauge all layouts have had spurts of interest followed by long periods of inactivity.

 

Re-gauging a Murphy Models B141 and some Irish Railway Models ballast wagons or Cement Bubbles to 21mm gauge either to EM or S4 standards using Ultrascale or Gibson wheel sets would probably be the simplest way of getting something running before making a final decision between handlaying track in 21mmm gauge or continuing in OO, while gaining experience in kit and scratch building rolling stock.

[Colin R]

My failure to get to grips with building a 21mm gauge layout in 20 years is more to do with external factors and personality than the challenges of scratch and kit building in 21mm gauge. Although my primary modelling interest is the Irish broad gauge I have tended to focus more on building locos and stock in 4mm to 5'3" and the 3' gauge than building a layout as until recently I did not have a suitable space.

 

I have a shortish span of attention and tend to have flirtations in various scales and gauges and over the past 30 years built American N & G Scale, an Irish 3' shelf layout and an EM gauge industrial layout. Apart from the N Gauge all layouts have had spurts of interest followed by long periods of inactivity.

 

Re-gauging a Murphy Models B141 and some Irish Railway Models ballast wagons or Cement Bubbles to 21mm gauge either to EM or S4 standards using Ultrascale or Gibson wheel sets would probably be the simplest way of getting something running before making a final decision between handlaying track in 21mmm gauge or continuing in OO, while gaining experience in kit and scratch building rolling stock.

 

Hi John

 

I have the exact same problems no space and a bit of a butterfly span of attention, I do admire all those guys who can stick to getting one model and get it finished

[Colin R]

I've been reading nothing but Scalefour Society literature recently and playing around with Templet. Its the way to go for serious modellers but to be honest it is a huge money/time add-on to any layout. I've just forked out £650 for a garden shed to build a new layout and small area for scratch building and to be honest I have to seriously question which way to go on track work before any firm decision.

 

Hi Tony

 

I spoke to the new owner of C&L Trackwork yesterday at an Exhibition and we both agreed that while a custom built 21mm gauge point might be say 25-35% more than an off the shelf Peco point, you just can't get that look any cheaper.

 

To be fair this is one of the reasons why I have found it so hard to get started with 21mm gauge, I have been quoted silly money in the past for hand built point work, but if you can find someone who can make a decent point at a reasonable price then other factors need to come in to the equation, such as will it save me time? It is one less problem to consider, we are not all good at everything in modelling, sometimes it is good to get others involved with our projects.

 

The guy at C&L who has just taken over, said that there are a lot of old computer files he has not looked at yet so they may be something in there, he appears to be very helpful and I guess it will be a two way development if he is to help us get 21mm gauge templates at some stage.

 

He did suggest for the short term that we could buy his P4 point work kits and then adjust them to 21mm gauge.

 

What we need now is someone to make 21mm gauge: roller gauges, back to back gauges and the tri gauge for curves as well and I am sure it will become much easier.

 

While it is early day, I did find him very helpful.

[Garfield]

Hi Tony

 

I spoke to the new owner of C&L Trackwork yesterday at an Exhibition and we both agreed that while a custom built 21mm gauge point might be say 25-35% more than an off the shelf Peco point, you just can't get that look any cheaper.

 

To be fair this is one of the reasons why I have found it so hard to get started with 21mm gauge, I have been quoted silly money in the past for hand built point work, but if you can find someone who can make a decent point at a reasonable price then other factors need to come in to the equation, such as will it save me time? It is one less problem to consider, we are not all good at everything in modelling, sometimes it is good to get others involved with our projects.

 

The guy at C&L who has just taken over, said that there are a lot of old computer files he has not looked at yet so they may be something in there, he appears to be very helpful and I guess it will be a two way development if he is to help us get 21mm gauge templates at some stage.

 

He did suggest for the short term that we could buy his P4 point work kits and then adjust them to 21mm gauge.

 

What we need now is someone to make 21mm gauge: roller gauges, back to back gauges and the tri gauge for curves as well and I am sure it will become much easier.

 

While it is early day, I did find him very helpful.

 

I was under the impression that these items are already available through the P4 Society?

[GNRi1959]

I was under the impression that these items are already available through the P4 Society?

 

Yes, I am a member of the Scalefour Society and am well aware of whats available. I think others, who may not be members are not.

Edited September 11, 2017 by TonyMcGartland

[Colin R]

Thanks Tony,

 

I was not aware of all the bits available via the Scale4 Society thanks for bring me up to date.

 

On RMWeb I asked the same question and some one has offered to buy the gauges I am after which inmy case will be the curved gauge widening three point gauge and there is another I have asked him to get me as well, just need to wait for a reply and the cost of postage for them.

[Garfield]

Yes, I am a member of the Scalefour Society and am well aware of whats available. I think others, who may not be members are not.

 

Well, that's me told then!

[GNRi1959]

Well, that's me told then!

 

Garfield, my reply wasn't intended to be abrupt or rude at all. sorry if you interpreted it that way.

[Garfield]

Garfield, my reply wasn't intended to be abrupt or rude at all. sorry if you interpreted it that way.

 

No worries, Tony. I'm guilty of short, snappy replies myself at times, especially if logged in on my phone!

[GNRi1959]

In my case my initial choice of running 00 was an urgency to see results and get things running. Once I achieved this I lost interest quickly. Going 21mm slows the process down and turns the urgency into a hobby with an on-going progression route and interesting challenge.

[Junctionmad]

I wonder why people insist on using 21mm gauge with EM wheelsets. EM wheels are noticeably wider than prototype so if you use them, the distance over the wheel faces is overlarge. That means loco splashers,valve gear, w-irons, bogies and other stuff often have to be wider than prototype, which looks as wrong as the wrong gauge. Better to model an EM version of 21mm gauge, which would be 20mm or slightly more, depending on how precise you want to be.

 

Everyone seems to focus on the gauge as being sacrosanct, but in reality I think you need to balance gauge against other factors to get the best balance.

 

This isnt quite correct, the slightly wider modern EM wheels will have little effect on loco dimensions , valve gear and splashers etc are not effected. Nor is there any reason to reduce the gauge to simply model in 21mm to EM flange ways. Its all about the crossing flange ways

Edited September 12, 2017 by Junctionmad

[Junctionmad]

Thanks Tony,

 

I was not aware of all the bits available via the Scale4 Society thanks for bring me up to date.

 

On RMWeb I asked the same question and some one has offered to buy the gauges I am after which inmy case will be the curved gauge widening three point gauge and there is another I have asked him to get me as well, just need to wait for a reply and the cost of postage for them.

 

could I suggest you join the society , its cheap and very useful no matter what 4mm gauge you model in

[Junctionmad]

Hi Tony

 

I spoke to the new owner of C&L Trackwork yesterday at an Exhibition and we both agreed that while a custom built 21mm gauge point might be say 25-35% more than an off the shelf Peco point, you just can't get that look any cheaper.

 

To be fair this is one of the reasons why I have found it so hard to get started with 21mm gauge, I have been quoted silly money in the past for hand built point work, but if you can find someone who can make a decent point at a reasonable price then other factors need to come in to the equation, such as will it save me time? It is one less problem to consider, we are not all good at everything in modelling, sometimes it is good to get others involved with our projects.

 

The guy at C&L who has just taken over, said that there are a lot of old computer files he has not looked at yet so they may be something in there, he appears to be very helpful and I guess it will be a two way development if he is to help us get 21mm gauge templates at some stage.

 

He did suggest for the short term that we could buy his P4 point work kits and then adjust them to 21mm gauge.

 

What we need now is someone to make 21mm gauge: roller gauges, back to back gauges and the tri gauge for curves as well and I am sure it will become much easier.

 

While it is early day, I did find him very helpful.

 

 

I build my own point work for my Irish layout in 00-SF. There would be no cost difference in pricing in a 21mm point. depending on what level of details ( chairs etc ) , a handbuilt point is cheaper then a PECO large radius point. This is , of course, building it yourself.

 

Secondly I would suggest that you consider building your own track work, Humbly,I suggest, If you dont have the engineering skills to build a point ( which is a simple process ), then I suspect you will find converting stock equally challenging

 

PS there is no need to buy c&L points kits, the sleeper lengths will be wrong anyway. Nor do you need to source templates Simply print a correct 21mm template from Templot, and then if you wish you can use C&L pre-made switch blades ( 16 quid a pair ) and buy their crossing Vees etc. However if you can use a file ( and buy the Scalefour filing jigs) then you can make your own in about 30 minutes.

 

Templot templates are much more accurate anyway then the the Societies or C&L templates , some of which have suffered from scaling errors over the years

 

If you dont have a background in this , then dont jump until you understand all the compromises

 

Note that no-one makes a check rail gauge for 21mm to EM standards ( nor do they make it for 21mm P4 i think ) ( which is more the pity ) , if you go 21mm to p4 standards , beware of the implications for rolling stock , the quality of track work and laying it etc

 

Note that roller gauges can be easily made from bolts and washers etc and verified by a micrometer, and you can easily build 3 point gauges with some judicious filing

you need a track gauge , a flange check gauge and a flange way slim to build a point, a 3 point gauge is useful for laying plain track

 

p4 is a world away from PECO , in order to get it running well.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Junctionmad

[Junctionmad]

I was under the impression that these items are already available through the P4 Society?

 

Here is what is available , whats missing is a check rail gauge , arguably the most useful gauge

 

 

95A Track gauge, Type 'A', Rollergauge - 5' 3" Gauge (21 mm) �5.20 1

190A Track gauge, triangular, for automatic gauge widening - 5' 3" gauge (21 mm) �9.50 1

( thats your three-point gauge you were looking for )

 

RSGA Roger Sander's 'Mint' gauge for fine tuning pointwork - 5' 3" gauge (21 mm

 

also these standard gauges are useful

192 Flangeway gauge �4.50 1

DDW01 Block gauge with crossing alignment aid (DD Wheelwrights)

 

In my experience, its was the need to build large amounts of plain track, that put me off 21mm, the pointwork is the fastest side of track building, constructing and laying " miles" of plain track inc fiddle yards etc , is what put me off

 

Again the only difference between 21 to EM as opposed to P4 standards , is the wider flange-ways and the point blades have to have a wider gap when open. Everything else is the same. back to back are then eased over P4, which helps to reduce running radius

Edited September 12, 2017 by Junctionmad

[Colin R]

Building the track is not a problem, I have in the past built both points and track in a number of gauges, what I was thinking about was more of a time saver if you could find someone else to do it for you.

 

Most layouts I see at exhibitions have a very simple design and consist of a run round loop with a number of sidings off of it, it is getting harder to find layouts that for want of a better reason are a bit more of challenge to operate or to view. To me, it would appear that some of the more complicated but interesting track layouts fail to get modelled.

 

I also realise that over time track plans where modified to make them more simple and easier to maintain, one thing I have noticed with a few Irish track plans, is the use of a siding coming off the middle of a loop on one side and crossing the other track of the loop via a diamond crossing and then going on to serve a good shed behind the loop.

 

Its these little quirks and curiosities which for some reason get missed out when a layout get modelled and would make a whole lot of difference to the character of the layout.

 

Either that or I just happen to want to make my life difficult when it comes to modelling.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Colin R
grammer mistake

[Junctionmad]

Building the track is not a problem, I have in the past built both points and track in a number of gauges, what I was thinking about was more of a time saver if you could find someone else to do it for you.

 

Great, getting handmade track built cheaply isnt a reasonable assumption, its time consuming work, and hence relatively expensive, suck it up as the americans say

 

Most layouts I see at exhibitions have a very simple design and consist of a run round loop with a number of sidings off of it, it is getting harder to find layouts that for want of a better reason are a bit more of challenge to operate or to view. To me, it would appear that some of the more complicated but interesting track layouts fail to get modelled.

 

This is a perennial issue for exhibition layouts ( and one my club finds difficult to resolve ) . challenging layouts by definition are " challenging " and at exhibitions , punters want to see trains running ( if you have ever manned an exhibition layout, its interesting to see how fast people drift off, when no stock is moving ) . Hence layout that require shunting, cross track movements etc are likely (a) to need multiple operators ( b) more likely to stall or derail and (b) often dont hold the publics interest

 

My club is currently deciding to build far more complex ( in comparison ) exhibition layouts , one that will inevitably require multiple operators and will work to signals etc. But its a big undertaking

 

Home layouts , where there is nothing to prove , is where you find much more complexity

 

o me, it would appear that some of the more complicated but interesting track layouts fail to get modelled.

 

SO im in the early stages of modelling claremorris in the 70s , 50 points , 5 single line junctions, massively signalled to support " knock " specials ( 10 passengers trains in the station at one time !) and also the attached ballinrobe branch ( which I have committed to exhibit next easter, --- gulp , just the branch mind you )

 

but without huge amounts of automation, running this whole layout at exhibitions will require 3-6 operators , a very big commitment

 

In my case I actively sought out a complex track plan, and its the reason I'm doing it in 00 , because in anything else , there is not a hope Id complete it inside 10 years . Most layouts in ireland that are complex, are simply too big to model , and applying huge compression, results in an untenable layout. Then again most track work in ireland , even in steam days , was relatively simple, with few uses of complex ladders and slips etc , unlike what was common in the UK ( where traffic densities where orders of magnitude higher )

 

Railway modelling is full of " biting off more then you can chew ", people massively underrate the time it takes to build a good quality layout, especially where there is any complexity

Edited September 12, 2017 by Junctionmad

[Junctionmad]

I also realise that over time track plans where modified to make them more simple and easier to maintain, one thing I have noticed with a few Irish track plans, is the use of a siding coming off the middle of a loop on one side and crossing the other track of the loop via a diamond crossing and then going on to serve a good shed behind the loop.

 

its not a track formation , I can say was common in ireland, most single line stations were very simply " tracked " with the goods siding typically in advance or in the rear of the station and primarily designed to be accessed in the direction of the majority of traffic , typically " from " Dublin etc . Land was comparatively cheap in ireland and many stations were quite sprawling, presenting challenges in model form

 

The formation you mention is more common on double lines, where the B of T rules frowned on facing points , so one line had to cross the other to access the yard. IN recent years the use of facing points is less frowned upon and such complexities are largely gone

Edited September 12, 2017 by Junctionmad

[GNRi1959]

When setting out the Goods Yard at Omagh my plan is to take the original engineers drawings that I have and overlay it with an imaginary grid which will give me references for the exact point positions and from this run centre lines through the pointwork and track that I can transfer to the actual baseboards. Sounds complicated but I think it will work.

[Colin R]

I totally agree with you regarding exhibition layouts, a friend of mind built a station called Chelfham on the 2ft gauge Lynton and Barnstaple Railway in North Devon, you could not get a simpler layout, a passing loop and one siding and it is a fantastic model, boring as hell to operate at an exhibition, yet when it was working, there was always three or four deep just to watch the trains pass by.

 

For me, my idea layout would be based on one of the American shunting puzzle designs, but it would incorporate a continuous run as well.

 

I know when I was little there was nothing better that watching trains go pass at speed, either in real life or on a model railway. Why is it we always wanted it to crash?

 

Good luck with Claremorris, if I had the room that would be one layout I would build as part of a team effort.

[Junctionmad]

I totally agree with you regarding exhibition layouts, a friend of mind built a station called Chelfham on the 2ft gauge Lynton and Barnstaple Railway in North Devon, you could not get a simpler layout, a passing loop and one siding and it is a fantastic model, boring as hell to operate at an exhibition, yet when it was working, there was always three or four deep just to watch the trains pass by.

 

For me, my idea layout would be based on one of the American shunting puzzle designs, but it would incorporate a continuous run as well.

 

I know when I was little there was nothing better that watching trains go pass at speed, either in real life or on a model railway. Why is it we always wanted it to crash?

 

Good luck with Claremorris, if I had the room that would be one layout I would build as part of a team effort.

 

thanks re Claremorris, its a big undertaking , but I'm a builder as much as an operator and its a interesting challenge , using 00-SF I can at least run off the shelf plain track etc

[Junctionmad]

When setting out the Goods Yard at Omagh my plan is to take the original engineers drawings that I have and overlay it with an imaginary grid which will give me references for the exact point positions and from this run centre lines through the pointwork and track that I can transfer to the actual baseboards. Sounds complicated but I think it will work.

 

 

The only issue with that is you are likely to need compression in a model layout, personally Id take one of the many layout design software apps and build by layout in that first , to see what the ultimate dimensions are

[jhb171achill]

This is exceptionally low-brow and low-tech, but what I did on several occasions while trying to work out what quart I could fit into a pint pot, was to mark track sections and points out full size on old newspaper with a marker pen, but the bits out and lay them in place. This will show what fits very early!

 

I know it sounds utterly ridiculous, but it's effective, and try as I might, no layout software is remotely intelligible to me!

[Mayner]

its not a track formation , I can say was common in ireland, most single line stations were very simply " tracked " with the goods siding typically in advance or in the rear of the station and primarily designed to be accessed in the direction of the majority of traffic , typically " from " Dublin etc . Land was comparatively cheap in ireland and many stations were quite sprawling, presenting challenges in model form

 

The formation you mention is more common on double lines, where the B of T rules frowned on facing points , so one line had to cross the other to access the yard. IN recent years the use of facing points is less frowned upon and such complexities are largely gone

 

Going off topic both Ferbane and Belmont & Cloghran on the Banagher branch had track layouts with the goods yard served by a crossover off the goods loop and a diamond crossing across the running line up to closure in 1963.

 

Presumably this saved a facing point lock and made shunting quite interesting. Smaller stations on the North Kerry & Limerick-Sligo line tended to have a similar track layout without the complication of the diamond crossing, this would have simplified attaching and detaching tail traffic to passenger and mixed trains.

[GNRi1959]

Some rough calculations taken today show that to model the actual footprint of the Omagh Goods Yard building along would required 785mm x 295mm. A huge building for any 4mm layout.

[GNRi1959]

Excited...... garden shed arriving tomorrow.

 

Looking for ideas on making this a permanent place to model. Need to make space for small table for scratchbuilding. I would also like to make the layout transportable so I can bring to model exhibitions at a later date.

Edited September 21, 2017 by TonyMcGartland