Castle Aching

[Donw]

I would save your cash on the SMP templates, and just download Templot. I have to say that I find it challenging to build a whole layout (minly because I find the terms used very confusing, and I get very little time to play with this sort of stuff), but you can use it to draw out point templates, and I have used it to build a crossover (my first point making trial).

 

You'll then get proper looking points.... (ok they are based on British Standard points, but there are earlier ones in there, and you can always add interlaced sleepers to make them look even older)

 

Andy G

 

Templot will do very nice old style straight switches for you . Instead of choosing an A or B switch choose a 9ft or 12 ft straight switch. If you are unsure about doing that I could print a couple out for you. There are also some short non prototype 'model' switches for those very short of space. If you need a turnout in a constant radius curve  rather than trying to create one to match the curve in the diverging route make one of the opposite hand and then using F6 curve the main line to the constant radius. I am thinking here of the turnout giving access to the yard sidings. 

Don

[uax6]

Those points are very interesting, how do the nose end of them move?

 

Andy G

[Northroader]

Two suggestions, mighty white boss. First, Simons idea to extend the engine shed road to make another loop into the main line makes good sense, look at Malmesbury, where for most of the time the shed road acted as the runround loop, and the middle siding as a dumping ground for anything lying around, gas tanks frinstance, so improving siding accommodation for stationmaster Mike. Second, lay the points etc out using a long flexible batten, pinned here and there as required which will give you nice smooth flowing curves, (cue: lewd piccies) rather than all this new fanged high tech stuff. Templot???Talking of piccies, isn't Kevin's shot of Aherns line just what's needed as inspiration?

Edit added for mr. UAX6 query, as I recall, the whole of the two point blades were mounted as a single unit joined by a bridging strip located centrally with a pivot, so that when the point was thrown, the switch end went one way, and the crossing end went t'other.

Edited May 9, 2016 by Northroader

[Nearholmer]

Andy,

 

There is only one moving part, which is made up of the two switch/wing rails, connected together with a plate, through which there is a pivot.

 

The check rails (and the wings for that matter) are purely cosmetic, and you will notice that Ahern has the check rails wrongly located (which doesn't matter, since they are only there to look pretty) and that both he and Wrenn have very large gaps between check and running rails, to allow for "gross" wheels.

 

If you Google "tinplate points", you can see the construction, and will notice that most don't even have wing rails ........ But, they will accept any wheel you throw at them, and present an unbroken surface as the wheel rolls through.

 

Them old boys knew a thing or two!

 

Kevin

 

PS: marvellous museum of vintage track and point-work here http://www.railwaypages.com/the-museum

Edited May 9, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Edwardian]

Modeller! Do you lack time, tools or even a basic level of ability?

 

Then you need Eezilay pre-built points. 

 

Eezilay - The Duffer's Choice

 

So, after some thought I concluded that the best chance for me to achieve track of reasonably prototypical appearance might be to go for SMP flexi-track combined with the company's Marcway pre-built turnouts, taking advantage of their 4 points for £90 deal (36" or 48", left or right handed); http://www.marcway.net/list2.php?col=head&name=Marcway+00+%26+EM+Pointwork

 

Nevertheless, I did try Googling "tinplate points" and got A Complete Course in Canning and Related Processes: Volume 2. Maybe it's just me [sigh].

 

Anyhow, you will notice the deal is 4 points for £90.  You will see from the plan that I had even tried to get away with 3 points so that'd I'd have one spare, such is my parsimony!

 

That said, I fully accept the advice to extend the shed road to form a loop, for the reasons given.  I can then clog either this road or the run-round loop with stuff; another engine, loco-coal, ash or sand wagons in the former, fruit vans or carriage trucks in the latter.  Or, for a bit of fun, I can clog up both and create a shunting puzzle!

 

I also take the (pun unavoidable) point about siding space.  An extra siding would mean an extra (full price) point, but I would certainly consider this.  Where might we place the third siding?

 

Malmesbury; yet another prototype crying out to be modelled!

[Donw]

Two suggestions, mighty white boss. First, Simons idea to extend the engine shed road to make another loop into the main line makes good sense, look at Malmesbury, where for most of the time the shed road acted as the runround loop, and the middle siding as a dumping ground for anything lying around, gas tanks frinstance, so improving siding accommodation for stationmaster Mike. Second, lay the points etc out using a long flexible batten, pinned here and there as required which will give you nice smooth flowing curves, (cue: lewd piccies) rather than all this new fanged high tech stuff. Templot???Talking of piccies, isn't Kevin's shot of Aherns line just what's needed as inspiration?

Edit added for mr. UAX6 query, as I recall, the whole of the two point blades were mounted as a single unit joined by a bridging strip located centrally with a pivot, so that when the point was thrown, the switch end went one way, and the crossing end went t'other.

 

Edwardian mentioned obtaining Marcway templates I was suggesting better templates. I do usually just lay out the curves and build turnouts onto them using lead tables to mark the pposition of the blades tips and the crossing as would a PW gang. I think Edwardian was thinking of using the templates to assist planning initially. One needs to be careful using a flexible batten for tight curves, the batten tends to take up a parabolic shape and create tight knuckles if you are not careful. On wider curves the parabolic effect is advantageous as it introduces a measure of transistion curve. If Edwardian wants I have some tables for both Straight and Curved switches.

Don

 

edit Edwardian posted while I was writing the above. Obviously if he is going to use Marcway points he needs their templates for planning. I thought that he might be planning to build his own to save the pennies. 

Edited May 9, 2016 by Donw

[uax6]

Can you not get those points as kits? It would save you a fortune if you can....

 

Andy G

[mullie]

Building your own points is not as difficult as you think. I taught myself because with a young family I couldn't afford a massive spend out on track. I never thought I'd be able to do it and I no longer work from templates but build simple point work in situ (not three ways) and I can't cut anything straight! Why not buy an SMP kit and try it?

Edited May 9, 2016 by mullie

[mullie]

On an East Anglian theme why not look at Ongar which was also built with a turntable as part of the run round. The goods yard might need simplifying to meet your needs. Might be worth a look?

 

If you want really quirky look at Wells next the Sea which included run round by gravity.

[Nearholmer]

As a result of falling over in the shed, while trying to cram into it an unfeasible number of bicycles, I've just (literally) stumbled upon a stash of Code 82 NS FB rail, about 15x3ft lengths, leftover from when I was making 7mm scale narrow-gauge track, more than twenty years ago.

 

PM me an address, and I will post it to you. FB might not be the WNR's thing, but it might do for sidings, and for point-making practice.

 

Kevin

[Edwardian]

Edwardian mentioned obtaining Marcway templates I was suggesting better templates. I do usually just lay out the curves and build turnouts onto them using lead tables to mark the pposition of the blades tips and the crossing as would a PW gang. I think Edwardian was thinking of using the templates to assist planning initially. One needs to be careful using a flexible batten for tight curves, the batten tends to take up a parabolic shape and create tight knuckles if you are not careful. On wider curves the parabolic effect is advantageous as it introduces a measure of transistion curve. If Edwardian wants I have some tables for both Straight and Curved switches.

Don

 

edit Edwardian posted while I was writing the above. Obviously if he is going to use Marcway points he needs their templates for planning. I thought that he might be planning to build his own to save the pennies. 

 

Thank you. I am not even able to understand what you are so kindly offering, I am so completely ignorant!  

 

Can you not get those points as kits? It would save you a fortune if you can....

 

Andy G

 

True, I could certainly do with minimising the expenditure, and thanks to you and everyone who encourages me to try new things, but when you speak of building points, my head just unscrews and clatters to the floor. 

 

Building your own points is not as difficult as you think. I taught myself because with a young family I couldn't afford a massive spend out on track. I never thought I'd be able to do it and I no longer work from templates but build simple point work in situ (not three ways) and I can't cut anything straight! Why not buy an SMP kit and try it?

 

I fear that I would merely add this activity to the list of things I panicked over, failed at and never had the nerve to try again (using a soldering iron/airbrush/Templot/Inkscape).  Hopeless. Please believe me, if you're me these things are that difficult!!!

 

 

As a result of falling over in the shed, while trying to cram into it an unfeasible number of bicycles, I've just (literally) stumbled upon a stash of Code 82 NS FB rail, about 15x3ft lengths, leftover from when I was making 7mm scale narrow-gauge track, more than twenty years ago.

 

PM me an address, and I will post it to you. FB might not be the WNR's thing, but it might do for sidings, and for point-making practice.

 

Kevin

 

That is very kind and would leave me no excuse!  I will send a PM.  Thanks.

 

Must, somehow, try to regain some confidence.  Repeat after me, "fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering"!

[corneliuslundie]

For plain track using flat bottomed rail you could probably get away with gluing to the sleepers if you really don't want to try soldering. You can add cosmetic fastenings if you wish. For plain track using bullhead by far the easiest is plastic chairs and sleepers held together with solvent. Lighter railways often used FB - as did companies such as the Rhymney. In those days they didn't always use baseplates, which makes things much easier. And one joy is that you probably need to cover everything with ballast so you will cover up any unsightly bodges. As long as the trains run well  that is what matters. But you do need some decent track gauges. Make sure they are for the size of rail you are using. Our club layout has suffered from sloppy gauges which have allowed the gauge to narrow.

Once you have built some plain track you can try a turnout. I am sure you can obtain a template from someone without shelling out good money. The crucial bits are getting the check rail gaps right (gauges again), getting a neat join between the two rails at the nose of the crossing (neat, careful filing) and ensuring that the switch rails sit tight against the stock rails, a matter of filing carefully again. And if the first one is a disaster all you have lost is some sleepers and some rail plus a bit of time.

But play around with some plain track first.

And if at first you don't succeed . . .

Go back to those exquisite buildings and save up fro some turnouts from Marcway or elsewhere.

Jonathan

[Northroader]

We are still talking of a layout using bog standard 16.5mm gauge track, aren't we? What's wrong with looking in at a "toy collectors fair" (I'll wash my mouth out with soap if you wish) there's usually a box full of old track needing some t.l.c. going dead cheap. Is the guy still trading in Parkgate, as you come out of the ramp from Bank Top station? I haven't been that way for a bit, he had such a box you could pick through.

[Caley Jim]

Thank you. I am not even able to understand what you are so kindly offering, I am so completely ignorant!  

It is a mistake that those of who are au fait with technical terms often make - we assume everyone else knows them too!  For example I mentioned the curb rail in the instructions for one of my wagon kits and someone questioned what I meant.*

 

To learn about trackwork you could do much worse than shell out £15 on 'Track' from the 2MM scale Association http://www.2mm.org.uk/products/trackbook/ .  It gives detailed information on prototype track and although the constructional techniques are aimed at 2FS, there is much that can be applied to any track standards and it has been widely acclaimed.   I suppose I should declare an interest in that I am a member of the 2MM SA and contributed a couple of photos to the book.

 

As for what you are capable of making, you can only develop your skills by testing your limits.  If something doesn't work out at the first attempt, sit back, analyse where it went wrong, learn and have another go.  The satisfaction from achieving something outside your normal comfort zone is well worth the effort.

 

Jim

* for those not in the know, it is the timber along the bottom edge of a wagon side which covers the ends of the floor planks.

[Donw]

Edwardian you commented that you didn't understand what I was offering. Firstly I offered to print off some Templates from templot which you could use to build points and to plan with. There are two key eleements to any turnout they are the angle of the crossing 1:5 1:6 etc  and the angle at which the switch blades are filed either 9ft, 12ft etc or A, B etc .

 

The crossing; for a 1:6 crossing for every 6inch along the rails the divergence will be an inch so at 1ft along the divergence will be 2 in etc. A 1:5 is sharp a 1:8 is gentle. For model use 1:6 which full size is quite sharp, will take our model trains at speeds which could not be used full size. 

 

The Switch blades are planned (full size) or file (on model) to taper to a point (hence the term points) these can be 1:24 , 1:32, 1:48. this closes against the stock rail and the angle of planning will determine the forces on the loco and stock when diverging from the straight. As with the Crossing angles we can use sharper angles than full size. The original switch blades were straight lengths of rail with about half the length planned identified by the planned length so on a 12ft switch the taper from the tip to the full rail width was 12ft long. Later they realised by curving some or part of the switch blades it would be less forces on the stock these were label A, B, C etc. These were introduced from around the turn of the century but only became widespread during the grouping. For a minor railway the older straight switches are more likely.

 

A 9ft 1:5 Turnout in 00 will have a radius at the tightest part of 26 in   distance from the blade tips to the crossing nose is 153mm

A 9ft 1:6 Turnout in 00 will have a radius  "          "           "        38 in                                                                                     173mm

A12ft 1:6 Turnout                                                                       36.9in                                                                                   191mm

 

excuse the mixed units just me . Note the 12ft 1:6 has a tighter radius than the 9ft 1:6 this is because the switch is more gentle the curve of the rail to met the crossing has to be a bit tighter.

 

I would be more than happy to print off and post off some for you I suggest a 9ft 1:5 and 1:6 L and R hands.

 

Possible the easiest way to build track is to use PCB sleepers and solder the rail to them. You do need to make gaps for electrical insulation in the copper surface but it is easier to adjust. For those who do not enjoy soldering the C+L plastic chairs and bull head rail.

On the other hand I quite enjoy making track perhaps I should make you a sample.

Don

[Edwardian]

Yours in haste this a.m., but wanted to acknowledge the advice and suggestions.

 

Don, that was a particularly helpful description of matters hitherto beyond my ken.  Simon, thank you for the invaluable information in your PMs.

 

Influenced by my long years of reading in the armchair, notably Mr Rice's 'Bible', my thoughts on the appropriate track for the WNR are:

 

• It's not a true Light Railway or that brassic.  The running lines would probably be bullhead and chaired.  Easiest way for me was the R-T-L SMP/Marcway stuff.  It looks better than Peco, and, though more expensive, I could get R-T-L points at half the cost of a C&L kit.
• The sidings could be more lightly laid with FB.  This would be only if I proved capable of making this track up myself. 

I am that brassic, however, and, if I am correct in assessing the General Will of topic contributors, it is being suggested that I build track and points from scratch based on templates.

 

Leaving aside the risk of a nervous breakdown at the mere thought of this, I would need components and equipment.  And this requires further research and calculation:

 

• What components/method do I use? 
• How much would it all cost?

Track gauges are expensive.  I would need an iron and all the stuff that goes with it.  In the long term (and I fully intend to build very many model railways) this would be a wise investment.  Cash-starved, I will have to consider the upfront cost compared with the SMP option.

 

Still, you have at least got me thinking about this!

Edited May 11, 2016 by Edwardian

[Shadow]

If you just want some basic templates for laying out, have you seen the free Peco ones.

It may help to just get an idea of space needed even if you eventually make your own.

 

Peco Templates

 

Dave

 

Note :- I'm using peco 75 as shown here. Looks OK!

 

[BG John]

Although I've built track in the past, this is the first I've made for about 30 years, so I was almost starting again. It's two SMP point kits, although they're only strips of copper clad sleepers, some lengths of rail, a tiebar and some solder. I ignored the template and instructions, and roughly followed instructions I read somewhere on RMweb instead. The template was printed from Templot. The basic tools I used were a 25 watt soldering iron, some side cutters, a razor saw, a needle file, a larger file and a fibreglass brush. Plus solder and flux. I used an EM Gauge Society 3 point gauge, and one of the Peco ones, because that's that's what I had available. The soldering is a bit messy, but I kept it to the outside of the rail where it won't get in the way of the flanges! A great thing about the 19th and early 20th century is that you can get away with ballasting over the sleepers to hide it!

 

If you're concerned about the cost of gauges, this Peco one is quite cheap. I prefer 3 point gauges, but it's the only one I've got for OO, and it does the job. A couple of them should be fine for what you need.

 

 

[Caley Jim]

Still, you have at least got me thinking about this!

Thinking about it is the scary part. Once you've had a go, with even partial success, you'll wonder what all the fuss was about!

 

Jim

[uax6]

My crossover was built with the aid of three gauges from Marcway (Not expensive!).

I filed away one outer edge on one so that I could use it all the way along the point (effectively the outer face that hooks over the outside of the rail. as you work around the point the rails get close together (think around the 'frog') and doing away with that edge you can keep the gauge all the way.)

 

I bought two point kits (the cheapest) and then bought some lengths of rail, and pre-cut copper clad sleepers.

 

I used a 25W iron with flat filed to 45* each side, a bit of wet and dry to clean the sleepers up with, and some normal leaded electrical solder.

 

Files used were: 12" half round file to file the switchblades, and then normal needle files to dress up.

 

A pair of long nosed pliers is useful

 

the result for my first effort?

 

Have a look:

 

 

It needs the solder cleaning up in places, but it works. (I didn't worry about getting the timbers in line, as lots of points have the timbers a bit higgledy-pigledly).

 

You don't need to interlace your sleepers (although lots of pre-grouping railways did it), but as I say, this was my first track I've ever built, and it only took about 4 hours too.

 

Have a try, it won't cost you much if you find you can't do it..

 

Andy G

 

[Edwardian]

Thanks one and all.  I am now very much tending towards soldering iron, gauges and track components as against pre-built.  Not in funds for either at present, so probably yet more cottages for now.

[runs as required]

My Goodness Me!

I've only been off line for a couple of days while my laptop has been given a blow through; now I find this thread has transformed from scrutinizing vernacular building patterns (a professional occupation for the last 30 years or so) to a wonderfully enlightening Pandora's box unpacking the mysteries of p.w. modelling beyond Peco code 75.

 

i.e all the questions one is too ignorant to even ask.

 

:yes: &

 

  dh

[Edwardian]

Well, here is the place to which you can safely come for answers to all those track questions you may be too embarrassed to ask (because I'm not)! 

 

Some time ago now I had pondered the question of what would be a suitable permanent way for a small independent company such as the Isle of Eldernell or the West Norfolk?

 

I was greatly influenced by the following passages in Railway Modelling the Realistic Way, by Iain Rice, Haynes Publishing, 2007:.

 

The main characteristic of traditional British track was the use of bullhead (dumb-bell section) rail carried in substantial cast-iron chairs and held in place with wooden wedges called ‘keys’.  This is a very sophisticated form of track construction only encountered in the British Isles (including Ireland) and on a handful of overseas railways originally laid out by British engineers. The various pre-Grouping railway companies developed their own individual patterns of bullhead track, using different chair designs, sleeper sizes and spacings, and lengths and weights of rail.
…
As well as the prevalent bullhead (BH) track, a few minor railways adopted PW of the pattern more common on the Continent.  This used Vignoles of flat-bottom (FB) rails, usually of quite small size, spiked or screwed directly to the sleepers without any chairs.  This was a cheaper but less durable form of track and in Britain was usually only found on secondary lines with lighter traffic – industrial, mineral and light railways of standard and narrow gauges, as well as on a good number of Irish lines.

 

This prompted me to consider the cases of the Isle of Eldernell & Mereport and the West Norfolk Railways.  Both were reasonably well-engineered small independent lines, rather than marginal propositions built under light railway legislation on a shoe-string.

 

The thought was that the running lines would use chaired BH rail, but that economies might be evident in the sidings, using FB spiked.

 

The model BH would use Code 75 flexi-track from SMP/Marcway or C&L.  Points were always the challenge, and I had thought the cheapest ‘finescale’ option might be the ‘4 for £90’ SMP/Marcway pre-built points.

 

If I were to build points, I confess my preference would be, if possible, to use chairs to match the flexi-track used, though I believe this is not always done, where construction is by soldering to PCB sleepers.

 

For the sidings, I had supposed that Code 75 FB rail could be soldered to PCB sleepers and represent FB rail attached by spikes to the sleepers. I note that Peco supply lengths of Code 70 FB.  I don’t know whether the difference between Code 75 BH and Code 70 FB is likely to cause derailments, as it seems to be relatively minor, but the idea of a lighter rail on the sidings appealed.  A true light railway project might have all its track and turnouts constructed thus.

 

I have to consider standards, components and methods further, and I have to learn how to build this stuff, but these are my first thoughts of the subject, my starting point, if you like.

 

Finally, here are a number of, more or less random, shots light railways showing (what looks to me to be) both chaired BH and FB laid on the sleepers, sometimes with baseplates. Atmospheric photographs, good for inspiration. 

Edited May 12, 2016 by Edwardian

[corneliuslundie]

Lovely pics.

In fact many of the earlier railways were around before BH rail was invented - via 'double headed' rail which was a good idea but didn't work. So as you suggest many railways could have had FB rail in sidings, moved from the main line as loads grew.

I mentioned the Rhymney Railway. It was unusual, I admit, but it used FB rail on its main lines until at least the turn of the 20th century - and it was neither impoverished (8% dividends) or bucolic - lots of heavilyy loaded coal trains. But i don't know offhand of other similar companies.

One small comment. DonW I think has been got at by his spill chucker. Planned should be planed, as with a plane.

Jonathan

Edited to correct typos - I can't blame the computer.

Edited May 12, 2016 by corneliuslundie

[Nearholmer]

Edwardian

 

Peco Code 70 FB is a strange cross-section, unlike most rail ever seen in reality. Their Code 82 FB, on the other hand, is very good indeed.

 

K