MY JOURNEY THROUGH TIME AND SPACE
A history of my O gauge Wirral Railway

IN MY RETIREMENT I now have a double track main line layout with two stations and a decent-sized loco depot. My locos range from a diminutive 0-4-0T to a West Country Pacific, a BR 9F 2-10-0 with sundry 2-8-0s, 4-6-0s and a varied selection of general intermediate locos.

First, to set things in context and to give some reason for the hows and whys of how my modelling has progressed. I have been involved in our wonderful hobby all my adult life and most of my childhood as well. My introduction to railway modelling was through my father who was an LMS enthusiast. We started off with secondhand stock, purchased from Hattons in Liverpool and what a fascinating emporium it was. We bought a Tri-ang 3F, some Wrenn track, a Kirdon controller a transformer and a few items of rolling stock.

Bliss.

He introduced me to the art of wiring, soldering, prototype practice and through the Railway Modeller, to a whole host of inspiration and practical advice. Our track was the original PECO with fibre sleepers and metal chairs, closed using a special tool, which I still have. This track was glued to lino strips. We progressed from Wrenn fibre based flexible track to PECO streamline track. We started many layouts but completed none. Service in the Royal Air Force was followed by military contracts in the Middle East, all the time still tinkering and reading. In the 1980s I came home for good. I moved up to O gauge and joined the Gauge O Guild and I have prospered.

During my working life, I progressed from being a team member to team leader then a manager and finally an executive. As an executive, I was faced with a constant stream of interruptions with widely varied problems, tasks and functions. After a time, I noticed that I had lost the ability to focus on a single task. I had developed a butterfly mentality. Hence, whilst my layout has been continually developed for the past 30-odd years, I have rarely completed any one aspect. For instance, most of my locos are incomplete. When they are running I tend to lose interest and go on to the next project, leaving them only finished on one side is a common occurrence. Still, it just proves that a model railway is never finished!

It was the loss of my father that started me questioning the accepted wisdom of the day. When he was alive, I had two garden sheds with a station in each, with my workshop in the larger shed. We operated a station each, with a toy telephone used to buzz bell codes between stations. Now I had to fit a complete layout in one shed, operate on my own and move my workshop to the smaller shed.

I wanted to sit at a station and watch main line and branch line trains go by, with shunting movements carried out for a purpose; such as attaching and detaching tail traffic from passenger trains, to split through passenger trains as at a junction. To handle both local goods and to have a marshalling yard. I wanted to create both a country and a city scene to give me variety. I wanted to watch trains from long ago, the thirties and from my youth. Also, as I matured in the hobby, I wanted to have proper signalling and head and tail lamps.

I also needed to fit all this in a nominal space of 16 x 8ft. The oft-quoted minimum radius was 4ft 6in but I wanted double track, a couple of stations and main line locos. The Gauge O Guild technical manual gives a minimum radius of 6ft for main line locos and 3ft radius for light railways using short wheelbase stock and lengthened couplings. These are for stock being pulled; for stock being propelled even more restrictions apply. I wonder how many modellers and potential modellers have been put off O gauge by the oft quoted minimum radius required for fine scale? How many pundits have actually experimented?

As an aside, I have noticed over the years that the same questions are asked on a frequent basis. I have also noticed that modellers, when describing their modelling often say “and I used the usual method of …” Perhaps if we all stated what method we used, newer modellers who may not know what the usual method is, would learn and maybe improve on it and in turn pass this knowledge on.

I set out to fit a double track main line with two stations in my shed. Obviously, the main task was to identify the constraints involved in persuading large locos to go around small corners. Hornby did it so why shouldn't I? So, using PECO flexible track, I started by laying out a curved track, gradually tightening the radius to see what actually happened. This was before the days of laser cut track templates, so I devised a variable radius track setting tool.

This enabled me to lay curves to a known and constant radius. The use of new track for this is of great help in producing a smooth curve.

Now that PECO set track is available, I would use that for the tight radius curves, but you would still need to take great care with the baseboards.

From this I established that with a firm and level baseboard and a smooth curve (i.e. no dog legs, kinks or large gaps in the rail), I could get most of my locos round a 3ft 6in radius curve. Further testing showed that, by thinning bearings, a ten-coupled loco could go round a 3ft radius curve.

This is now the radius all my stock must negotiate, though with the advent of laser cut track templates I do start my curves with a large 4ft radius, then a 3ft 6in and then a 3ft radius. Remember, this was a new requirement, I already had several kit-built locos built prior to the change in circumstances. All of them, with minimal changes, are in regular use.

Most pundits talk about gauge widening and super elevation on curves for tight radius curves. Again, I tried practical experiments and I can state that neither are required. To get my 4-6-0 and 4-6-2 locos to negotiate a 3ft radius curve I also had to alter how the front bogie was pivoted. Rather than a floppy, very flexible operation, I fitted a load-carrying bogie with minimal sideways movement which helps to guide the loco into curves.

Prototypical. This is based on the system used by Leinster Models whose models feature strongly in my loco stud. The most difficult locos to modify are the 2-6-2T and 0-6-2T types, they tend to have a longer wheelbase and steps just where the pony truck swings. The solution is to change the pivot point. Another consideration is balance and weight. Within reason, I have found that a properly balanced and weighted loco will negotiate my bends more reliably than before.

All my locos have full brake gear and sand pipes. It only takes a bit of adjusting to get them to fit without shorting. With white-metal brake shoes, you can chamfer the back using a half round file to give increased clearance with the coning of the wheel. With the use of Slater's wheels, you can have an electrically dead frame, so it does not matter, electrically, if the brake shoes make contact with the wheels when squeezing round corners.

The same holds true with split frames, though I had to prove that the split axles are able to take the stresses involved in grinding round my bends. Having said that, I do have locos with live frames, still with full under-frame detail. To test the suitability of split frame locos, I have built a GWR 47XX 2-8-0 from a Frank Smith kit using a Premier Components frame kit and machined cast iron wheels from Walsall Model Industries. While I was very pleased with the result, the extra work involved with making the split axles did not seem worth it.

The fact that subsequently the leading axle has failed has decided me that, for me, normal current collection is best for larger locos, though on my next large loco the tender will be split frame. As I do not know whether it was faulty workmanship on my part or the stresses caused by grinding round tight radius curves which was the cause, I will have to start small and see what happens.

As it happens, I saw a CCW loco body kit for a GWR Collet 0-6-0 for sale from Steamlines and bought it. Very efficient service. Whilst testing the chassis on my test curve, I decided that the stress on the driving wheels appeared to be low, so this will have a split frame tender and loco but with both wheels on the driven axle insulated, insulated bearings and crank pin bushes, making it 10-wheel current collection. We shall see.

So, you can get your loco around corners, but what about the dreaded buffer locking? Again, I think this is a case of perceived wisdom. Within pretty broad limits I have no problems propelling coaching stock through crossovers and round my curves. I would point out that, in my view, the majority of problems with using very tight radius curves lie in the quality of baseboards and track laying.

My 54XX 0-6-0PT and auto-coach manages very well: the loco pulls the coach round the outer curve and pushes round the inner curve. I do have to watch the 2-6-2T and 0-6-2T so I may well fit slightly larger diameter buffer heads to these. It is a small price to pay for a main line layout rather than a single-track branch line.

My normal passenger train is of three to four corridor coaches, which are regularly shunted to and fro from the carriage sidings, through cross overs and reverse curves. Even so, my Hall, West Country and Patriot can all take an eight-coach train, whilst my LMS 4P 4-4-0 will handle a six-coach train on the inner circuit.

When operating my 1900s era I run a GWR Dreadnought coach. My only concession, at present, to tight radius, is only to run it on the outer circuit. When time and inclination coincide, I have a solution which will allow its use over the whole system.

So, with a level one-piece baseboard at either end of the shed, smooth curves and attention to the running gear, you can get your locos to negotiate toy train corners.

Some discussion has taken place concerning 'top of the range’ scale kits with the consensus being that as they are to scale, they would require major surgery to allow them to go around corners. My first trial was with a DJH 2-10-0 9F, built as per instructions apart from some thinning of bearings. It works. My next was a much coveted MOK BR class 4 2-6-4T, stung by comments on the Guild’s web site, that all sorts of tweaks and butchery were required. All that I did was to cut off the frame overlays behind the driving wheels, and I am not certain that this was required. This loco will negotiate an 'S' bend created by using two PECO set track points in the loco depot. Again, practical experiment proves that it is possible.

Having got all this to work, pending my retirement, I decided to treat myself to a new and longer shed for the layout: 20 x 8ft. A very helpful salesman sorted me out with a new shed that would just fit into the space I had. He also sorted out the removal of the old shed and suggested that, as the new one was a bit bigger, he would increase the size of the frame timbers at no extra cost.

It came, was erected and then I discovered that because of the increased frame timbers I had lost two very important inches of internal width. Don't forget that the dimensions quoted are outside dimensions. You lives and learns to always look gift horses in the mouth!

However, with a bit of butchery the offending timbers have had chunks removed to re-claim the lost inches, though it’s not pretty.

Further hindsight also applies to the location of power sockets, switches and the baseboard height. Starting with a shiny brand new shed, I positioned a fused spur where the power cable entered the shed and fixed the sockets around the walls at waist height. Some 12 years later it is a nightmare. I can't reach the fused spur as it is high up in a corner and the sockets are under the 2ft 6in wide baseboards and are very uncomfortable to reach.

When I started to build the baseboards, I set the height to allow my bicycle and vacuum cleaner to fit underneath. If I had set the height a little higher, at window ledge height, I would have benefited from an extra inch or so of window ledge width for the platform at Neston station.

The extra length, some three feet or so, gave me space for a larger loco shed to house my growing stud. However, I then found that I needed some carriage sidings to enable more prototypical operation. So the loco shed went. But I still needed somewhere to hold my growing collection of locos. A lower level base board was made which allowed for a much-improved loco depot. But – how to get to and fro?

Interestingly there is not a lot of information on how to do this. Even the Americans with their multi-level layouts are very quiet on this matter. I needed a reliable remotecontrolled lift. Internet – nothing. Magazine searches – nothing, Though Jas Millham did coyly mention a lift in some of his articles in the Model Railway Journal and the late Peter Denny wrote an article in the Railway Modeller describing a Meccano lift he had made.

Then I found the answer in my local dog grooming parlour. A Dog Lift. The right size, the right amount of travel and a handheld remote control. I bought one and it is perfect.

Micro switches are used to cut off power to the highlevel approach track when the lift is going down and to lower a barrier on the low level exit when it is going up. This uses a low-ratio gear box powered by redundant battery chargers of the type we now seem to accumulate … in case they come in useful.

This then introduced a new problem. The loco depot is under the main line, just where I planned to fit a signal gantry. The plan was to have the operating servos under the baseboard (See Gazette Vol 19, issue No. 8 for details of the installation.) Due to the new loco depot there is no longer the space to fit them, either underneath or to the side. Again, the solution involved a bit of lateral thinking. The operating servos are very small (you can get smaller – but at increased cost) so fit underneath the bridge of the gantry, concealed by the timber beams. This will also greatly simplify the operating linkage. As the gantry will only be fully visible from the back, this subterfuge will not be readily apparent as this will be an LNWR gantry so is of a rather massive build.

Around this time, I also converted to DCC. The only drawback is the use of curly cables to connect the handheld controller to the base unit. If you just put the unit down whilst operating, the cable can hurl the unit to the floor. The solution is the use of holsters dotted round the baseboards to hold them securely. They can be made quite easily from the ‘come in useful’ stock cupboard or by purchasing laser-cut kits from many manufacturers at shows.

With DCC you can park a loco anywhere, even in the depths of a loco shed. Obviously, you need a means of showing which locos are on shed and where. I made a small shed diagram with LEDs to show the position of the points and with hooks to hold a little plaque with the loco number to show where in the shed it was.

My layout is based on the Wirral, where we had the LNWR and GW joint (later LMS and GWR), the GC (later LNER) and the Mersey Railway. We had direct carriages from New Brighton to the south coast, and SR stock from the deep south, lots of dock traffic, our own coal mines and in the 1960s 9Fs hauling iron ore from Bidston Docks to John Summers’ steel works at Shotton. With the oil refineries at Ellesmere Port as well, there was a huge variety of companies and stock. As with most modellers, I have more stock (and still growing), than can be justified by the size of the layout. My solution is to run in three distinct eras. The 1900s, the 1930s and the 1960s. Each offers its own character and flavour and the excuse for more stock. For the 1960s era, I intend to heavily weather the private owner wagons on one side and to renumber them into the BR ex-private owner series, to allow their use without causing an anachronism.

To provide variety, I have based the fictitious Birkenhead East on Birkenhead Woodside with the approach in a deep cutting, overlooked by buildings and industry and given it an LNWR infrastructure; I have even included a small dock. It is, however, a through station.

Neston is set in open country with very little in the line of buildings; it is very firmly GWR. Neston had two coal mines, a cable factory, a farm machinery production company, fishing, a reasonable agricultural output and with some 15 pubs, a pretty good beer trade. We also had three railway stations, but enough is enough!

With the layout's location set and its relationship with the surrounding area fixed, its traffic flows can be worked out, not forgetting to take account of distances and speed. Different types (head code) of traffic had their own speed limits.

A map of the railways in your chosen area will be of great help in giving destinations and origins of traffic. Remember, you do not have to strive for 100% accuracy: your layout may not be able to cope with all the traffic that could be generated, it’s only a hobby.

My intention is to have a seven day, 24 hour sequence starting with the early morning slow goods and mineral trains with the overnight parcels and newspaper services, then the workmen’s trains followed by the school run, then the early commuter traffic and the long distance expresses, interspersed with the regular ordinary passenger and goods services. Towards late afternoon, there is a gradual reversal with the school children and commuters returning and the beginning of the night services. The weekend will give scope for engineering trains, special loads and so on.

Operation also includes the use of correct head and tail lamps. Whilst this can be very fiddly, it does add a lot to the discipline and satisfaction of operation and also adds time to operating. No longer can a loco run round a train and depart in the opposite direction within a matter of seconds. By the time you have changed the head and tail lamps you will find that quite a bit of time has elapsed. I have started to plan the sequence using the computer programme for presentations, with each move on a separate display.

Up to now I had been using mainly three-link/screw couplings, again a bit fiddly, but prototypical. I had experimented with various auto couplings and had decided on the excellent Dinghams for the coaching stock as they can still operate with three-link/screw couplings. However, now that the time had arrived to start proper operation a major snag came to the fore.

Remember that I wanted to sit and watch trains go by and to attach/detach vans and coaches and that a good bit of both stations was covered to hide the tight radius? This presented major problems in operation:

1. To uncouple, the stock had to be accurately positioned for the electro-magnets to function
   
2. Due to the tight radius curves, the couplings on the locos bent under the strain and then coupling on the straight became a problem
   
3. To be fair, these couplings were not designed for this abuse.
   

Again, a bit of lateral thinking produced a solution. I needed a robust coupling capable of mass production and remote operation, even when you could not see where it was. A search on the internet produced details of G-scale stock fitted with radio controlled servos operating the couplings, and the Keen-System of onboard uncoupling with tension-lock type couplings, using DCC for OO gauge stock. I bought several of these and experimented. These are small units for use in OO tenders, so will fit in a 7mm coal bunker.

I have fitted a couple of locos with the Keen-System, but replacing the supplied cast resin coupling loops with the old type Tri-ang tension lock couplings. They are robust (child proof), low cost and are designed to operate on 13½ inch radius curves. The locos allocated for passenger use (what a blessing to have far too many locos!) have just the coupling loop fitted, so the pivoted drop arm is removed from the coupling and put aside for later use. Whilst this worked very well, I felt that a more robust operating system was required to cope with O gauge stock. So, based on the Keen-Systems unit, I devised a robust system worked from the DCC system light facility. When activated it completes a circuit which powers a miniature low voltage relay which powers a diode rectifier from the 16V AC track supply power to operate a powerful solenoid which drops the coupling loop. This loop is pivoted to allow it to drop 30⁰.

The easiest traffic to plan is your passenger/parcels, starting with the coaching stock stabled overnight, to allow for cleaning and water tank replenishment. The first train of the day could be the overnight parcels, then the workmen's, followed by the school run (remember the eras I am modelling.) Then the ordinary passenger, with maybe newspapers to be off-loaded, or milk churns to be collected. You would not have too many express passenger trains but attaching and detaching tail loads or through coaches for onward movement will all add to the sense of purpose. Then as the day progresses, the flow can slow down, the school children return, then the commuters and then workmen and your parcels and expresses.

So, I now have my double track main line, with two stations, a decent sized loco depot, plenty of operational capability and all in my 20 x 8ft shed.

I have followed the correspondence on prototypical operation with some interest, as, in order to operate in a prototypical manner you must not only know and understand the rules by which your company operated, but, just as importantly you must know what traffic your line would generate and what the area you purport to serve would consume.

Most of the books available on model railway operation are only concerned with the rules. To ascertain what traffic your line would have, you need to know what industries/services it provided for, what type of area and its population and how it connected to the surrounding railways. Then you can apply the rules.

This can be a fascinating area of research. In fact, too fascinating. I started this article by saying that we started many layouts but finished none. This was brought home to me as I developed the thinking behind the operational planning. What I had done, yet again, was to build a layout, then try to fit prototypical operation on it. My track plan had evolved as I played trains. If I removed the loco shed, then I would have room for two carriage sidings in its place, I could squeeze in an extra platform face, an extra siding by the dock and so on. All very nice, but what did I really need?

When planning for operation, I have to take into account the limitations that are imposed by the existing track plan and if possible, make yet more changes to the track plan, to enable proper operation. In fact, as I progressed with this article, my thoughts ranged far and wide. In a perfect world, we would plan our railway model in detail. Every aspect would be considered, construction would be to a plan which allowed for ease of construction, with no lastminute contortions to fit the backscene or point motors or signalling to avoid baseboard supports.

It was interesting to read that the late David Jenkinson made provision for access to the rear of his ‘last project’ by making his baseboards weight-bearing and with solid wood platforms to support crawling boards.

As per normal, my back scene is to be fitted last. By this time the low relief buildings and the covered ends were all in place, they were designed to be removable to allow access to the rear of the layout. But, due to additions to the baseboards and extensions to the additions, I could not reach into the corners to secure the back scene. Nor had I followed David Jenkinson's example to make provision for crawling boards.

So, plan B. I glued the back scenes to card sheets cut to fit. This made the back scene much easier to manoeuvre but this only worked at the easy to reach corner. For the other end I intend to use bendy MDF sheet with the back scene glued on prior to fitting. The idea is that the rigidity of the MDF will allow fixing by one corner and then to manipulate it into position without it flopping around – it will be some 5ft in length. I may well use strong language!

My current track plan and location is very limiting. The Wirral is a peninsula some 15 miles by 8 miles – how to justify lots of through running with loco changes and adding/removing tail traffic? Rip it up and start again? If operation was the aim, why not go back to 4mm? The RTR is stunning, well-priced and offers a good selection. I could get more railway in, maybe a complete system like Peter Denny's or even 2mm, even more railway for my space and again, reliable and well detailed stock.

Common sense prevailed, why did I progress to 7mm? Because I enjoyed all aspects of the hobby and wanted the satisfaction of ‘that's all my own work,‘ especially the construction using loco kits such as CCW, Leinster and those of Frank Smith. So I will stay with what I have got. It’s only a hobby to be enjoyed, so enjoy it.

I am now convinced that, if your long term aim is proper operation, then, if you first plan its operation in reasonable detail, then design a track plan which will enable you to carry it out, then you are well on the way to a satisfying operational layout. Another very important factor, if you want to operate your layout in a prototypical manner, is that your layout must work. By that I mean that your locomotives and the stock should move smoothly each and every time, your points and signals should be easy to operate, and you can easily operate your chosen coupling system. Otherwise you are doomed to frustration, likely to take short cuts (hand-shunting that awkward wagon) and generally not enjoying your layout.

When I say your stock should move smoothly, that does not mean that your goods vehicles should glide through your points. I remember watching shunting and the wagons did not glide. They lurched, they groaned and squealed as they were shunted. No need for sprung suspension on your humble goods wagon. In fact, I am quite proud of my squealing wagons.

Over the years I have noticed that the most interesting and atmospheric layouts have been those that are set in a complete and believable setting, the layouts of Don Rowlands, P B Denny, Frank Dyer, Chris Pendleton, David Jenkinson and P D Hancock to name but a few who spring to mind. They are all well worth re-visiting. This gives you a context in which you can start to plan your operation.

Remember, you do not have to strive for 100% accuracy, your layout may not be able to cope with all the traffic that could be generated, it’s only a hobby.

Planning the passenger services first also gives you your available paths for goods traffic. For the Goods I estimated the outgoings from Neston in Table 1. The estimated incomings are in Table 2.

For the time being I have ignored the iron ore trains from Bidston to Shotton. They will be included in the 60s era and will replace the coal trains as the mines closed in the 1920s although kept open for my purposes until the 30s. (The real reason is that I have not finished the coal mine, never mind started the steel works.)

Birkenhead is operated as a marshalling yard, with incoming trains sorted and dispatched; the only traffic for Birkenhead is cable drums and coal for the docks, loco depot and local coal merchants. To allow the use of more rolling stock than can be held on the layout, I have imagined that there is both a wagon repair facility and a mail order company accessed from the dog lift. Wagons can be hand-shunted and stored on the dog lift until required for use. It also adds further movement on the layout. Likewise, the only traffic originating at Birkenhead is the coal and cable empties together with pit props from the docks and repaired wagons and parcels vans going back into traffic.

As I planned how to operate the layout, I started to realise just how little I actually knew. For example, I had always planned to have a coal mine. I have books, magazines and photographs about coalmines. So I made a mock-up of a washing/loading screen building, based on Neston and other small mines. Val asked why was the railway entrance so low? I explained that it was because locos were not allowed inside, only the wagons went inside – fire hazard etc. Then I started to think – how were the wagons loaded, some of these screens had over 10 tracks, so either a method of moving the wagons inside the loading screens so that a fixed conveyor belt could be used or a very sophisticated loading system had to be used. I bought books on the operation of coalmines. It was mind blowing.

I had to stop.

Like most modellers I do not like waste, I have a large stock of ‘come in useful’ items. I make extensive use of cereal packets for mock-ups of buildings and locos. My two coalmine locos are only rough cardboard models but they work. Corks from wine bottles can be used as wagon loads to represent rolls of something. (They are also useful to seal the ends of water pipes when moving washing machines)

I have read some very disparaging remarks about the original Wrenn universal points in OO. To my mind the concept of a universal point, giving a continuous support to the wheels as they go through the point means that curved points on a 3ft radius would be possible. This would allow further operational options with a crossover on the hidden tracks. The real railway uses them so why don't we? After all, these bends would be hidden under scenery. Their use would allow me to have carriage sidings off the curve underneath the covered area between the stations, going outside the shed. So that’s something for the future.

The main reason I went into DCC was the facility for sound. Listening to a BR type 4 diesel at a Wirral O Gauge Group meeting was the clincher. However, on a roundy round layout it does become tedious to say the least. So much so that in the 1960s era, I only use the horns. But what if you fitted a latching relay on the loco, connected to the speaker, and activated by a magnet at the start of a tunnel or over bridge and on the exit? This would cut off the sound as it entered the tunnel and give a burst of sound as it emerged. Totally automatic and realistic.

I have also experimented with the little sound units you get in greeting cards. They are cheap, small and you can record your own sounds. With a bit of effort, you could operate them from the lights facility on a DCC chip to allow a loco to give a whistle or beep as required. I leave this for others to do.

I have my workshop in a shed, my layout in another shed and have converted my garage into a clean workshop where I make my buildings and do my painting. I find that I get quite a lot of exercise going to and fro. It also gives me a bit of thinking time, as I walk from one to the other, for a better way of doing something, or not making such a big mistake.

Some time ago I started an inventory of my models, on my computer. This was tedious and time-consuming. I was given a proper card index system. I now use this to record each model. How much, whose kit, livery, number, chipped, value etc, for when the time comes …

Over the years that I have been a Gauge O Guild member, I have benefited from the hard work of our volunteers; the Gazette editors spring to mind and the hints, tips and ideas freely passed on, through our Gazette and the web forum, though at times it can get a bit caught up in its own importance! I have also benefited from the various model railway magazines with their contributors passing on much welcome advice and information.

I thank you all.

I accept that I can always do better, but maybe not just yet. There may also be another way, all it may take is a good looking at. It is only a hobby so should be enjoyed.