Laser Cut Catenary Portals

[James90012]

Hello all

 

While trying to find out more about the supposedly upcoming Peco and Dapol catenary portals, I came across some highly interesting Laser Cut portals on Ebay. I was just wondering if anyone:

- has purchased these

- has an idea of what they look like scale-wise

- has ideas of how one may incorporate a representation of the contact arms

 

I might bite anyway, at a tenner for ten portals (!) seems there's nothing to lose!

 

The description notes that any feedback or suggestions would be welcome - seems that some of our resident OLE experts could offer some really useful ideas here. The description also notes how the company can make to order, so surely if its feasible could these be a solution for a cheap, representation of OLE portals, led by RMWeb?

 

Links (no connection):

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Laser-Cut-OO-HO-Gauge-Catenary-Gantry-Frame-Kits-250mm-Multi-Track-Pack-of-10/122369413820?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160908110712%26meid%3D2919f41bb7df49899c62d385ec1ad4df%26pid%3D100677%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D16%26mehot%3Dpp%26sd%3D122313840757%26itm%3D122369413820&_trksid=p2385738.c100677.m4598

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/p/Laser-Cut-Oo-ho-Model-Railway-Catenary-Gantry-Kits-120mm-Twin-Track-Pack-of-10/565866461?iid=122313840757&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D43781%26meid%3D23f957ba5e5a4e0884e95a00731c8d93%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D6%26mehot%3Dpp%26sd%3D122369413820%26itm%3D122313840757&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m18510

 

[Titan]

They seem to look like fairly reasonable representations of the heavier duty Mk1 portals with double channel masts, especially for the price. Slightly reminiscent of the early Triang portals. For two track areas you would normally use pairs of cantilevers rather than two track portals, although they could be used at more complex locations like crossovers. They are MDF kits,so assembly, surface finish and painting could be interesting!

[jim.snowdon]

They are what I would call plausible, and not too far removed from the real thing. One weakness, literally, is that they lack any horizontal bracing in the portal boom, which will make them both more vulnerable to damage and less capable of withstanding along track tensions in the wires.

 

Jim

[Titan]

They are what I would call plausible, and not too far removed from the real thing. One weakness, literally, is that they lack any horizontal bracing in the portal boom, which will make them both more vulnerable to damage and less capable of withstanding along track tensions in the wires.

 

Jim

 

Well spotted. They should have similar triangular bracing top and bottom of the boom too.

[bescotbeast]

I tried these and gave them away, they are way too tall

[Titan]

I tried these and gave them away, they are way too tall

 

Are you aware of how tall they are supposed to be? With enough space to hang the wires at normal height and clearances (i.e. not near a bridge or level crossing), the boom should be somewhere near twice the height of the train running underneath.

 

Not only that, but if sawing a bit off the bottom of the masts is beyond your skill level, then I am not sure how you will cope with any of the other challenges that will come up in the course of building even the most simple model railway...

[Joseph_Pestell]

They do look a bit out of proportion, but decent enough given the price. Would be better in some sort of plastic rather than mdf.

[bescotbeast]

Are you aware of how tall they are supposed to be? With enough space to hang the wires at normal height and clearances (i.e. not near a bridge or level crossing), the boom should be somewhere near twice the height of the train running underneath.

 

Not only that, but if sawing a bit off the bottom of the masts is beyond your skill level, then I am not sure how you will cope with any of the other challenges that will come up in the course of building even the most simple model railway...

cobblers , these portals are over-scale and as i paid for them i'd expect some accuracy wouldn't you?????. I did look at adapting them but they were just too fiddly. And yes,  I am aware of how tall they are meant to be  and posted my response to help save someone from wasting their hard earned cash and save them the disappointment I felt.

 

I do wonder from your reply whether these are your products, if so, you're lucky I didn't leave you negative feedback on theifbay...

[bescotbeast]

Are you aware of how tall they are supposed to be? With enough space to hang the wires at normal height and clearances (i.e. not near a bridge or level crossing), the boom should be somewhere near twice the height of the train running underneath.

You are joking I take it? try reading up on the subject matter before posting 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71391-british-railways-ole-part-one-plain-track/

[Dagworth]

You are joking I take it? try reading up on the subject matter before posting 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71391-british-railways-ole-part-one-plain-track/

Typical portal drawing from official BR drawings, this one is a portal near Stafford

 

 

The real portal is 24ft 1inch overall height above railhead height, that's 96mm in 4mm scale

 

The laser-cut portals are 92mm clearance, so presumably that is the measurement from the foot of the leg to the underside of the portal bridge. By the time you add in the thickness of trackbed, sleeper and rail (about 6mm) that allows 86 mm clearance, allow 10mm for the depth of the portal bridge itself and that comes pretty damn close to the prototypical overall height for a portal. It would seem to me that the laser-cut portals are pretty much EXACTLY to scale and it is Bescotbeast that needs to read up on the subject matter.

 

As an aside I personally am not too keen on the look of the laser-cut portals, and I wonder how you would go about attaching the hanging gubbins for the wires themselves, N-Brass look much more convincing 

 

(Second portal from camera is N-Brass)

 

Andi 

[bescotbeast]

Typical portal drawing from official BR drawings, this one is a portal near Stafford

 

00007.jpg

 

The real portal is 24ft 1inch overall height above railhead height, that's 96mm in 4mm scale

 

The laser-cut portals are 92mm clearance, so presumably that is the measurement from the foot of the leg to the underside of the portal bridge. By the time you add in the thickness of trackbed, sleeper and rail (about 6mm) that allows 86 mm clearance, allow 10mm for the depth of the portal bridge itself and that comes pretty damn close to the prototypical overall height for a portal. It would seem to me that the laser-cut portals are pretty much EXACTLY to scale and it is Bescotbeast that needs to read up on the subject matter.

 

As an aside I personally am not too keen on the look of the laser-cut portals, and I wonder how you would go about attaching the hanging gubbins for the wires themselves, N-Brass look much more convincing 

 

IMG_0921.JPG

(Second portal from camera is N-Brass)

 

Andi 

Andi, I bought one of the portals, well in fact three of the b#ggers, as I've stated and I'll repeat myself for your specific benefit "THEY WERE OVERSCALE".

Overscale I hear you ask? yes Andi they were far too tall, so tall they looked ridiculous and it towered over my two N-Brass portals, they looked silly when running stock under them.

 

I don't profess to be an expert but I know when something looks wrong as I'm sure you do.

[Dagworth]

Andi, I bought one of the portals, well in fact three of the b#ggers, as I've stated and I'll repeat myself for your specific benefit "THEY WERE OVERSCALE".

Overscale I hear you ask? yes Andi they were far too tall, so tall they looked ridiculous and it towered over my two N-Brass portals, they looked silly when running stock under them.

 

I don't profess to be an expert but I know when something looks wrong as I'm sure you do.

You do know that N-brass portals are supplied with underscale length legs don't you? That's why I had to get Nick Tilson (of N-brass) to make longer legs for them... see http://www.nbrasslocos.co.uk/oocat.html item 4553 extra length legs

 

Andi

[Titan]

cobblers , these portals are over-scale and as i paid for them i'd expect some accuracy wouldn't you?????. I did look at adapting them but they were just too fiddly. And yes,  I am aware of how tall they are meant to be   and posted my response to help save someone from wasting their hard earned cash and save them the disappointment I felt.

 

I do wonder from your reply whether these are your products, if so, you're lucky I didn't leave you negative feedback on theifbay... 

 

Quite clearly you are not aware of how tall they should be, as they are indeed as Dagworth has shown to scale, and of correct height.

 

Wrong guess on your last line too!

 

 

You are joking I take it? try reading up on the subject matter before posting 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71391-british-railways-ole-part-one-plain-track/

 

If you had not read the thread so selectively not only would you have seen that I have read it, I also contributed to it. And if you read posts 26 and 27 there is a pretty big clue as to how I know what the height should be off the top of my head without having to read or look up anything.

 

Andi, I bought one of the portals, well in fact three of the b#ggers, as I've stated and I'll repeat myself for your specific benefit "THEY WERE OVERSCALE".

Overscale I hear you ask? yes Andi they were far too tall, so tall they looked ridiculous and it towered over my two N-Brass portals, they looked silly when running stock under them.

 

I don't profess to be an expert but I know when something looks wrong as I'm sure you do.

 

Not only that, but the type of portal you posted in post 16 of the other thread is not the type that was sold on Ebay, but like the shorter one sold by N-brass - i.e. the N-brass ones are supposed to be shorter than the type sold on e-bay.

 

You do know that N-brass portals are supplied with underscale length legs don't you? That's why I had to get Nick Tilson (of N-brass) to make longer legs for them... see http://www.nbrasslocos.co.uk/oocat.html item 4553 extra length legs

 

Andi

 

That means the N-brass ones will be even shorter still!

 

Bet the N-brass ones being underscale did not even occur to you did it?

 

So, now being presented with an actual official drawing which 100% proves they are accurate, plus evidence that the n-brass ones are too short, plus the testimony of actual professionals and actual experts in the field (as opposed to internet 'experts'), are you still going to try and convince yourself that they are 'overscale' rather than admit your own ignorance?

 

Real OLE portal structures are big things, and headspans even bigger!

Edited March 28, 2018 by Titan

[Dagworth]

If you had not read the thread so selectively not only would you have seen that I have read it, I also contributed to it. And if you read posts 26 and 27 there is a pretty big clue as to how I know what the height should be off the top of my head without having to read or look up anything.

 

Remind us what you do for a living Ian

 

Andi

[bescotbeast]

Quite clearly you are not aware of how tall they should be, as they are indeed as Dagworth has shown to scale, and of correct height.

 

Wrong guess on your last line too!

 

 

 

If you had not read the thread so selectively not only would you have seen that I have read it, I also contributed to it. And if you read posts 26 and 27 there is a pretty big clue as to how I know what the height should be off the top of my head without having to read or look up anything.

 

 

Not only that, but the type of portal you posted in post 16 of the other thread is not the type that was sold on Ebay, but like the shorter one sold by N-brass - i.e. the N-brass ones are supposed to be shorter than the type sold on e-bay.

 

 

That means the N-brass ones will be even shorter still!

 

Bet the N-brass ones being underscale did not even occur to you did it?

 

So, now being presented with an actual official drawing which 100% proves they are accurate, plus evidence that the n-brass ones are too short, plus the testimony of actual professionals and actual experts in the field (as opposed to internet 'experts'), are you still going to try and convince yourself that they are 'overscale' rather than admit your own ignorance?

 

Real OLE portal structures are big things, and headspans even bigger!

Remind us what you do for a living Ian

 

Andi

I didn't realise you pair were related. Mutual back scratching does wonders for you both. 

Still stand by my original comment that these are over-scale and look ridiculous, buy three and put them against a ruler and I may well concede BUT as I've said before I did waste my money on a pack of three and they were awful, they towered over my UNDERSCALE (your comments not mine) N-Brass gantries

 

Anyway why highlight my particular post in the other thread? I simply directed you to that thread in GENERAL, not to a particular post. Post 16 as you "rivet countingly pointed out" was me adding to that debate in general, it has no bearing on what is going on here.

 

Here we see an UNDERSCALE N-Brass gantry, barely leaving room for a Bachmann class 37 to pass beneath. 

 37080 on the steel by Simon Barnes, on Flickr

When I get home I'd better follow yourself and Andi's so good advice, and rip this and it's fellow brethren out, for fear that it looks quite silly and not up to your standards.

 

Ian, remind me what you do for a living 

[Andy Y]

Being remarkably unpleasant will reduce the chance of you receiving good advice in the future. Wind it in now please.

[Titan]

Being remarkably unpleasant will reduce the chance of you receiving good advice in the future. Wind it in now please.

 

As far as I am concerned Bescotbeast can do as he pleases, my concern was to ensure the OP or anyone else who reads this thread was fully aware of how erroneous Bescotbeasts assertions are, and ignore them accordingly.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Titan

[bescotbeast]

i was simply trying to save someone there hard earned cash

[wombatofludham]

Having found BescotBeast's purchase in my dirty underwear following a visit I thought it might be worth sharing a set of photos of the offending (or offensive if you prefer) gantries.

 

First of all, they are very finely laser cut fibre board which I found easy to bend and break when trying to assemble the components, but look OK.

 

The side support:

 

The cross portal. There are two per gantry.

 

The side support fits into a square base

 

...giving this result

 

The second side support

 

The top cross-spans slot over two cut-outs on the side supports. It's a bit fiddly but simple.

 

End result

 

There are no top or bottom trusses to connect the two cross-spans, which the real portals would have, but the gap is quite small and the portal, once glued, should be robust.

 

 

I managed to bend and snap one of the side supports when fitting into the foundation pad, which suggests that they would struggle to support any serious attempt at tensioned wiring. Other than the faff of getting the cross beams to slot into the fixing slots, they were a simple job to assemble. Width wise this type seems a bit narrow but I note that the eBay seller and manufacturer Torri Laser (Welsh for "Laser Cut by the way!) do now market a wider gantry.

 

Overall I would suggest that it depends very much on what your personal views are on overhead equipment as to their suitability. If we assume a spectrum from "I can't be arsed, my electrics run on an invisible very long extension lead" to "I'm not satisfied unless I can run out real copper wire from a 4mm scale wiring train and hand knit my own portals", these would satisfy someone who perhaps doesn't want to model the wiring and droppers/register arms, but feels the need to have some form of structure there to suggest the trains have something for the coathanger to run along. Just like the n-brass alternatives, you would either have to scratch-build or source the wiring supports and register arms, and given the relative delicacy of the laser-cut material, supporting any substantial weight from them would be problematical. Despite that, and depending on the level of detail you want to go to, they might be a relatively quick way of erecting a minimalist suggestion of an overhead line system.

 

I'll butt-out of the scale argument, unfortunately when I contacted Jeremy Kyle's agent to see if he would host a debate on the issue his head was so far up his backside he was giving himself a blow dry every time he farted and wasn't interested.

 

In summary then:

 

1) They are relatively simple to put together, tab and slots and of course, no soldering:

 

2) Once glued they should be stable:

 

3) They can be a bit fragile to clumsy handling, so probably wouldn't withstand knocks of any weight being hung off them but I'll caveat that by saying I've not tried them for strength, it's just based on my damaging two side supports with cack-handling

 

4) They would obviously need painting and detailing if you wanted more than the portal frames as scenery

 

5) They are probably best suited to the less finescale end of the market.

 

I don't know if that is any help at all. Whether I will use them does depend on my current plans for the layout which are in a state of flux, and not the soldering kind because as we know I have a phobia of soldering...

Edited March 29, 2018 by wombatofludham

[Titan]

Sounds like a very fair appraisal. 

[James90012]

 I think you're right - as we see in every model railway OLE thread (and even AC loco threads) we find such an array of expectation, from trains being able to draw power from the wires to portals only with no wires right through to no wires/portals at all!

 

For me personally, I will most likely glue pantographs to a fixed height (seems a shame with the Bachmann 90 though), and run with the pantograph just under the wires. That's why I'm interested in this as I won't be adding tension. The key issue though for me is how best to model the droppers and what wires to use, which I need to give more thought. Perhaps Peco wires could work.

 

That said, the Peco Portal (if it ever arrives) has all of this in one, though it will end up being a far more expensive overall option.

[bescotbeast]

Thank you Mr Wiles, I'd forgot I'd handed them over to you, in my eyes they ain't right, I wanted them to be right but they look terrible.

[Titan]

Thank you Mr Wiles, I'd forgot I'd handed them over to you, in my eyes they ain't right, I wanted them to be right but they look terrible.

 

They don't look too bad from the sides, but from the top not so good. Which is a pity since unlike the real world, that is where they are viewed from...

[bescotbeast]

They don't look too bad from the sides, but from the top not so good. Which is a pity since unlike the real world, that is where they are viewed from...

That was the point I was clumsily trying to make, they don't look right. I was extremely disappointed with these, as I was looking forward to populating my layout with further portal masts without having to obtain N-Brass gantries.

[mwrosebury2000]

Just had a look at these, it states the size in the listing and for the price alot cheaper than other alternatives. Things on the real railway often look wrong at scale for some reason, so they are probally true to scale (I dont work on OLE and dont fancy trying to measure it so will leave that to the experts). I am going to be ordering some of these if they look right then they will stay, if not they will go. Until I can buy a warehouse and quit my job I will continue to have compromise on my OO layout.

 

Mark