Castle Aching

[Edwardian]

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

 

Funny you should say that ...

 

It would be good if I could use that for this project.

[Donw]

Edwardian

you do like to complicate matters. Firstly the size of the rail. Early railways were laid with fairly light rails these were typically replaced with heavier ones as they wore (or broke a problem with early rails). Since the sidings took less wear (stopping and starting heavy trains cause the most wear). they were not replaced as quick and as time went on the slightly worn main lines were often relaid with heavier rail and the worn rail was used in sidings. Rail is sized by its weight per yard 50lb or 60lb rail may have been used originally later in may have been 80lb the standard became the 95lb rail. Although some heavier rail has been used.

In Model form the code 75 rail is close to the 95lb standard rail. It is heavier than some minor railways would have used. In theory you could use a smaller rail section to represent a lighter rail. Firstly these are not common in bullhead. Secondly the lighter rail can cause problems with the deeper flanges used on models. This especially occurs when the track is chaired. Indeed some older 00 models have problems running on the code 75 track. However as people are used to seeing code 100 track the use of code 75 looks quite light and does not jar on minor railways. If you want a light effect the use of FB rail with no chairs or baseplates reduces the height above the sleeper and gives a light railway effect. For a really light effect code 55 FB looks quite good on narrow gauge models. There is a similar effect in the to some the use of code 75 BH direct onto sleepers looks to low for mainlines especially when used for turnouts joined to chaired flexi track.

A further factor is the ballast. Before the turn of the century many railways laid the ballast to cover the tops of the sleepers effectively making the rail look lower. This was abandon because whether or not it increased the likelihood of the sleeper rotting it did hide the fact that a sleeper might be rotting.

 

My thoughts;

To lay really lightweight track you need to use wheels with shallow flanges P4 would be ideal.

Code 75FB direct onto sleepers will I think look quite good for you sidings etc.

If you wish to use chaired track for the main lines (and it does look proper British track) then you have to consider what method to use for the turnouts. I have a feeling if I sent you a sample turnout made using the plastic chairs you would want that look.

I am wondering if the first turnout and the approach roads were made in chaired track and the sidings and their turnouts laid in FB would that be the effect you want.

 

Apologies for going on at length but I am trying to explain quite a bit.

Don

[johnarcher]

Just a thought - if you were soldering FB rail to PCB sleepers for sidings I'd think even code 55 might be possible - due to the lack of chairs giving more clearance for flanges. I think Peco do a code 60 FB too.

Then the sidinggs would look suitably lighter/older than the standard chaired bullhead elsewhere?

[Edwardian]

 

If you wish to use chaired track for the main lines (and it does look proper British track) then you have to consider what method to use for the turnouts. I have a feeling if I sent you a sample turnout made using the plastic chairs you would want that look.

I am wondering if the first turnout and the approach roads were made in chaired track and the sidings and their turnouts laid in FB would that be the effect you want.

 

 

 

Thanks, Don, again very helpful.  What you say above is absolutely right.

 

Just a thought - if you were soldering FB rail to PCB sleepers for sidings I'd think even code 55 might be possible - due to the lack of chairs giving more clearance for flanges. I think Peco do a code 60 FB too.

Then the sidings would look suitably lighter/older than the standard chaired bullhead elsewhere?

 

  John, I believe Peco sell Code 60 FB, or did, for depicting the conductor rail on electrified lines. 

 

EDIT:  According to the Antics site, the dimensions of the Peco Code 60 FB are:

 

A 1.57mm 0.062in

B 0.76mm 0.030in

C 1.24mm 0.049in

Edited May 12, 2016 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

Slowly evolving thoughts and edging toward commitment!

 

The mainline and the platform road have been upgraded in the late Victorian period to chaired BH.  I think that the same may have been the case for the run-round loop and the shed road (locomotives get heavier and the shed road gets a lot of use as a loop).

 

The sidings will be FB laid directly on the sleepers.  The turnout on the platform road leading to the sidings will, of course, be chaired BH, but the other siding turnout (or turnouts if I opt for a third siding) should logically also be FB, as Don has pointed out.

 

There is no intention to run passenger trains into the siding behind the platform, so I think it likely that this would be fenced off to prevent access from the platform for passengers.  I wondered if this might double up as (a) the siding serving the goods shed, and ( b ) the siding providing an end loading dock facility. 

 

The second siding, furthest from the platform, might be where cattle pens might be located.  There would be room for a large crane.  I would expect the local coal merchant to offload at the end of this siding.  I expect he would do so with the aid of a plank straight onto his wagon.  This might make a nice little scene and also avoid the vexed question of coal staithes.

 

I am considering a third siding.

 

So given this plan, I thought I'd better have a look at what was on offer.  Leaving aside soldering stuff, gauges, ballast, fishplates and what not, and just concentrating on the track, I made the following comparison between SMP and C&L.  I should say that I have excluded pre-built points, full point kits or the pre-assembled crossings/frogs and pre-planed rails, and have done so for reasons of cost because building the points has to be cheaper than the £25 pre-built SMP points:

 

For Plain Track in Sidings – Code 75 FB laid directly onto sleepers:

• SMP NSR75FB Code 75 Nickel Silver Flatbottom Rail (12 Yards) = £15.00
• SMP Pre-Cut OOSL 100 X OO 3.5mm X 32mm Sleepers = £6.50

 

For Turnouts in Sidings – Code 75 FB laid directly onto sleepers:
• SMP NSR75FB Code 75 Nickel Silver Flatbottom Rail (12 Yards) = £15.00
• SMP CCS4 OO/EM 4mm Wide PCB Sleeper Strip 18X 12" 1.2mm = £7.50
• SMP Copper-clad point kits = £6.99 to £8.75

 

For Plain Track on mainline, platform & shed roads & loop – Code 75 BH chaired:
• SMP Scaleway Type J OO Nickel Silver Track, 10 Yards = £43.00
• C&L FlexiTrack - Thin Sleepers - OO 16.5mm - Nickel Silver - Box 25 metres = £121.00

 

For turnouts from mainline, platform & shed roads & loop – Code 75 BH chaired:
• SMP NSR75 Code 75 Nickel Silver Bullhead Rail (10 Yards) = £10.00
• C&L Rail - N/Silver Code 75 - Bullhead (10 yards) = £10.00
• SMP Plastic Point Kits (Chairs/Timbers only), 36” only = £7.99
• C&L Plastic Point Kits (Chairs/Timbers only) = £12.00

Edited May 13, 2016 by Edwardian

[Caley Jim]

......

There is no intention to run passenger trains into the siding behind the platform, so I think it likely that this would be fenced off to prevent access from the platform for passengers. I wondered if this might double up as (a) the siding serving the goods shed, and ( b ) the siding providing an end loading dock facility.

 

 

Either of these was a common arrangement. On Connorburn I had such a siding as both livestock landing and end loading, fenced off from the platform as you suggest.

Jim

[uax6]

Do you need to fence of the siding that runs behind the platform? What height do you envisage your platform being at? I'm presuming that the passenger service would be at best sporadic, which would allow traders to make use of the second platform face to load things into the wagons, as not all traders would have access to carts, some would use hand barrows, which won't be as tall as carts, and therefore the extra height of the platform would help speed up the loading.

 

Coal merchants often used the wagon of coal as their store. The railways weren't always very good at getting the demurrage for their wagons used as such, and therefore the wagons could sit around for months waiting to be unloaded. For PO wagons (if the merchant had his own) he would often keep the coal in them until it was empty. Therefore a wagon with its door open wouldn't look out of place. The coal often being shovelled from the wagon straight into the sacks on the cart. I don't really think you need any staithes.

 

How much livestock would you expect to deal with? The Highland for example dealt with vast amounts of sheep moving about, yet the provision for pens was very small, mainly at the more important stations. Everywhere else dealt with livestock by using hurdles (often the farmers, as I have discovered no evidence of the Highland having any of there own stacked up in any photo).

 

Could you end up with 'odd' points? Ie the main running line has been replaced with BH, but the turn off into the yard is still FB? I'm not sure of the mechanics of this, but it seems feasible to me.

 

Word of warning about the copperclad point kits. The points are much shorter than you think given the radius quoted. I ordered their 24" ones and found them much shorter than I expected (about the same length as a small radius peco), which didn't really matter as I was going to use them to mess around making the points above. I would buy just one, just so you can see how they are intended to go together, and use it as the basis for making one that suits your desired shape.

 

Andy G

[Donw]

I think you have worked out a very believable setting.

 

The coal siding could well have the cattle dock at the start. The use of coal staithes is much less common than modellers sometimes think. The coal merchant would order the coal to arrive at a suitable time to meet his deliveries. There was a period allowed for unloading before demurrage charges were raised. Well organised it might be cheaper to load his lorry from the wagon rather than to unload to space that may well incur some rental.

A small station may well have a goods shed which didn't have the track passing through. Those on the TANAT valley had a platform adjacent to the track with an awning to protect the goods being unloaded which might fit well. I think lamborn was similar.

Don

[BlueLightning]

Hi James,

 

I love the sound of the plans and look forward to seeing it develop.

 

Gary

[Andy Hayter]

On the track components, I note you have not included pre-fabricated Vees for the points.  You can of course make your own, but premade ones make life a lot easier.

 

I am of course assuming that these are still available since I last bought one some 25 years ago.   It is just that then these were silver soldered items - something your average soldering iron will struggle with - and precision made to the correct angle/ratio.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Andy Hayter

[Nearholmer]

I concur with others that the "standard recipe" a rural goods yard was by no means the "universal recipe".

 

Variants that I can think of include:

 

- coal stored in locked sheds (Southwold railway - theft rampant??)

 

- coal stored in structures like open-fronted cart sheds (Bembridge IoW, and other places where wind might blow dust into houses very nearby)

 

- coal neatly stacked into piles like brick-hacks or turnip-clamps, using the bigger pieces to create "walls" (common in the London area)

 

- coal dumped in a loose heap (common where it didn't get in the way)

 

- open sided things like Dutch barns in goods yards (several places, but I don't know why! Storing fruit boxes and baskets out of season?

 

- cattle pens on passenger platforms;

 

- cattle pen on the loco-shed coaling dock (Seaton, Devon)

 

- lock-up goods stores on passenger platforms, rather than a typical goods shed (very common at less busy stations)

 

- dual-purpose goods siding and passenger bay (fairly common, with Seaton Devon again a great example)

 

- "horse landing platforms" (some with signage saying so) at random places

 

- special churn banks;

 

- boarded sections of platforms for rolling churns;

 

- cattle herded direct into wagons at the passenger platform, using hurdles or a few yokels waving sticks and shouting " Goo on thar gal!" or local variant thereof.

 

The list goes on, and some photos of independent, as opposed to "big company", stations suggest that the distinction between goods and passenger handling parts of the station could get very blurred.

 

K

Edited May 13, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Edwardian]

I concur with others that the "standard recipe" a rural goods yard was by no means the "universal recipe".

 

Variants that I can think of include:

 

- coal stored in locked sheds (Southwold railway - theft rampant??)

 

- coal stored in structures like open-fronted cart sheds (Bembridge IoW, and other places where wind might blow dust into houses very nearby)

 

- coal neatly stacked into piles like brick-hacks or turnip-clamps, using the bigger pieces to create "walls" (common in the London area)

 

- coal dumped in a loose heap (common where it didn't get in the way)

 

- open sided things like Dutch barns in goods yards (several places, but I don't know why! Storing fruit boxes and baskets out of season?

 

- cattle pens on passenger platforms;

 

- cattle pen on the loco-shed coaling dock (Seaton, Devon)

 

- lock-up goods stores on passenger platforms, rather than a typical goods shed (very common at less busy stations)

 

- dual-purpose goods siding and passenger bay (fairly common, with Seaton Devon again a great example)

 

- "horse landing platforms" (some with signage saying so) at random places

 

- special churn banks;

 

- boarded sections of platforms for rolling churns;

 

- cattle herded direct into wagons at the passenger platform, using hurdles or a few yokels waving sticks and shouting " Goo on thar gal!" or local variant thereof.

 

The list goes on, and some photos of independent, as opposed to "big company", stations suggest that the distinction between goods and passenger handling parts of the station could get very blurred.

 

K

 

Some great prototype details there Kevin, but do any of them feature a pyramid?

[Donw]

On the track components, I note you have not included pre-fabricated Vees for the points.  You can of course make your own, but premade ones make life a lot easier.

 

I am of course assuming that these are still available since I last bought one some 25 years ago.   It is just that then these were silver soldered items - something your average soldering iron will struggle with - and precision made to the correct angle/ratio.

 

C+L ones are not silver soldered and at £12 for the V alone doubles the cost. I have not found any problem with a soft soldered V.

Don

[uax6]

And making the v is not very difficult either. Just a bit of time with a file.....

 

Andy G

[mullie]

And making the v is not very difficult either. Just a bit of time with a file.....

 

Andy G

I now use a dremel to do the initial filing and finish by hand. Makes things much quicker. As I said in a previous post if I can build track anyone can.

[Nearholmer]

Well.....

[Trains&armour]

Nice shot,  but the positioning of the pyramid has little to do with the railway. Or Cestius must have been a very visionary man.....

[Edwardian]

Well.....

 

Defeat conceded ...

[runs as required]

Castle Aching as the Eternal City!

You could have occasional 'special' HO running weekends with old style Breda brown and red Art Deco railcars and a Crosti boiler 2-6-0 shunting the yard.

dh

[Edwardian]

The latest plan, more or less.

 

I have decided that the layout will go in the workshop outbuilding, once this accommodation is powered and insulated.  This gives me a comfortable 10'.

 

EDIT:  PS it has power; I discovered this when I largely emptied it this afternoon!

Edited May 15, 2016 by Edwardian

[Nearholmer]

These two young chaps seem to quite like the idea......

[Edwardian]

Topping!

[Donw]

Looks a good plan. You have had the sense to keep the tracks accessible  and in a nice flowing curve.

Don

[Edwardian]

Platform?

 

Might as well think about this.  Two thoughts, so far:

 

• This is an 1850s station.  Relatively impressive, but a backwater.  The old 1850s 40' turntable has never been replaced.  The sidings retain lightly laid FB rail.  There is a distinct absence of upgrades.  The platform was built to a height to contend with 4-wheelers with the low continuous footboards of the period.  It has never been heightened.  So, we are not looking at narrow gauge, US, tramway low or non-existent platforms, just lower than became standard in the Twentieth Century.  Suggestions on the appropriate height are invited. 

 

• Material.  I like my funny little railway to be distinctive.  Rather than the usual edging stones, how about bull-nosed blue brick?  

In this, I am encouraged by a West Norfolk GER-Constituent precedent.  Below is a picture of the West Norfolk Junction Railway's station at Sedgeford, opened in 1866.  This was a bucolic extension of the profitable (and Royal!) Lynn & Hunstanton Railway, though technically a separate company.  Of course, the bullnose edging might not be the original.

 

Platform likely to be gently curving, as per latest plan.

[Donw]

I would suggest 2ft -2ft 6in for the platforms I  would probably do a check with a mock up and a coach with footboards to see what looked right. The blue brick would look nice and could have come by rail from Staffordshire. Looking at some old Cambrian platforms they had paving around the station building but further away looked like a compacted surface.

Don