Small curved scissors

[Rowsley17D]

At some point in either the late 30s or more unlikely during the war the MR scissors were replaced with a more conventional scissors design as shown in the photo below.

 

 

At some time the double slip also was replaced but I don't know when. It could have been after the closure of the coal yard in the old MR shed area.

 

 

If I ever get to make a representation of this station, I think I'll go for the LMS scissors and no double slip.

 

The last photo is from the J W Sutherland collection and can be used if credited. The top one is by L M Hobdey and will be removed if copyright is infringed.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Rowsley17D

[Velopeur]

Its unfortunate that the only large scale OS maps of Buxton appear to be 1922 and the 1960s. Basing your model on the late LMS track plan or later would get rid of some nasty pointwork in the goods yard and loco shed area too.

[Rowsley17D]

Yes, I don't want a slavish copy of Buxton MR just a model that gives a representation of an MR terminus station in a confined space.

[Velopeur]

Yes, I don't want a slavish copy of Buxton MR just a model that gives a representation of an MR terminus station in a confined space.

There were very few compact Midland main line termini. The original station at Gloucester is the only other one that immediately springs to mind, though with substantial sidings and other appendages attached.

[Rowsley17D]

While keeping my foot up following an op, I had a go at trying to make a conventional scissors crossover to replace the facing and trailing crossovers on the approach to my station. Track spacing is a scale 6'. Using various help postings in this forum and the Templot one, this is the best I could come up with. But would it work in practice as I have had to omit the checkrails from the diamond vees as they conflicted with the switch rails?

 

[roythebus1]

I'd suggest you'd have to make the check rails inside the diamond as a diamond otherwise as you say the crossings are partially unchecked.

 

[Rowsley17D]

11 hours ago, roythebus1 said:

I'd suggest you'd have to make the check rails inside the diamond as a diamond otherwise as you say the crossings are partially unchecked.

 

 

With total diamond checkrails.

[Grovenor]

That deals with the checkrails for the 4 turnouts but not the ones for the diamond Vs that the op asked about.

There is no room for them due to the distortions from prototype of using 00 gauge. You may get away with it but if not then its a lot of building wasted.

Experiment with various asymnetric Scissors to see what can work, You may have to move one of the diamond obtuse crossings into the 4ft.

Edited March 19, 2021 by Grovenor
typo

[Rowsley17D]

28 minutes ago, Grovenor said:

Experiment with various asymmetric Scissors to see what can work, You may have to move one of the diamond obtuse crossings into the 4ft.

 

Thanks for the suggestion but if only I knew how to do this! Back to Templot.

[roythebus1]

Maybe widen the track centres?

[Grovenor]

By the way, when you say track spacing is a scale 6 ft. what are you measuring? Since the track gauge is narrow but the loading gauge is not you need to increase the 6 ft so that the track centre to centre is correct.

Centre to centre should be 11' 2", near enough 45 mm in 4 mm scale.

[Grovenor]

To try options in Templot, make a facing crossover, then make a trailing croccover and set it to show only the rails.

Then you can overlay the rail only one on top of the other and slide it along to see the effect.

[Rowsley17D]

12 hours ago, roythebus1 said:

Maybe widen the track centres?

 

9 hours ago, Grovenor said:

By the way, when you say track spacing is a scale 6 ft. what are you measuring? Since the track gauge is narrow but the loading gauge is not you need to increase the 6 ft so that the track centre to centre is correct.

Centre to centre should be 11' 2", near enough 45 mm in 4 mm scale.

 

The adjacent track spacing is the Templot default at 72" which has track centres at 134". This is the spacing of the double track on my layout and changing it would mean redoing most of the trackwork which I don't want to do.

[martin_wynne]

Hi Jonathan,

 

The solution is to offset one crossover with respect to the other. You should then be able to find a position where all the V-crossings can be checked:

 

 

With a bit of adjustment to the check flares to ensure the knuckle gap is fully checked.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[Rowsley17D]

1 hour ago, martin_wynne said:

Hi Jonathan,

 

The solution is to offset one crossover with respect to the other. You should then be able to find a position where all the V-crossings can be checked:

 

 

With a bit of adjustment to the check flares to ensure the knuckle gap is fully checked.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Thanks Martin for the suggestion but that's above my skill level at the moment.

[Grovenor]

Its not so hard, described here.

 

[Rowsley17D]

6 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

Hi Jonathan,

 

The solution is to offset one crossover with respect to the other. You should then be able to find a position where all the V-crossings can be checked:

 

With a bit of adjustment to the check flares to ensure the knuckle gap is fully checked.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

Okay, so I've managed to make a "simple" off-set scissors crossover but I cannot make the diamond using the method for the previously posted scissors. This is as far as I can get.

[Rowsley17D]

Having put to one side the above formation, I came upon a tutorial by @martin_wynne on an Interlaced Crossover/Straightened Slip and had a go with greater success. Here it is before I start to tackle the tidying up by  splitting it up into partial templates and adding the timbers.

 

[Grovenor]

The first one still has problems with the diamond vees, not the check rails but the wing rails. The second is very tight around the K crossings. Possibly no really good answer. Good luck with it, for the last one I would do the tidying up around the K crossings first to make sure they are buildable,

Edited March 25, 2021 by Grovenor

[Compound2632]

I have a pair of curved nail-scissors in my toolbox. I saw this topic and was going to comment on how useful they are, especially for cleaning up tabs on etched brass parts, then I realised...

 

Excellent thinking here - I'm looking forward to seeing all this theory taking flesh! One question: how far do the various offset solutions proposed conform to what the prototype did? Obviously the model will be on a tighter radius than the prototype.

 

In other words, not only will it work, but will it look realistic?

Edited March 22, 2021 by Compound2632

[Rowsley17D]

This is another try to get the diamond checked, although at this size it looks just like the previously posted image.

@Compound2632 I'm trying to get something like the photo on page 1 the one with 2 trains standing just before the formation.

Edited March 23, 2021 by Rowsley17D