Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

Allow me to first introduce myself: my name is Hans

I live in Geldrop, near Eindhoven, the Netherlands, and I re-started railway modelling in 2014.

I eagerly browse this forum because it has a wealth of really good and professional information as well as wonderful examples and showcases.

In 2006 I was one of the Founders of Beneluxspoor.net

After a fantastic vacation in rural Kent last year, I started with a British based 4mm scale model layout.

The design of this layout is a co-production with my Dutch friend Sierd Jan Tuinstra (Trains&armour on RMweb). 

 

I also joined the Eindhovense Model Hobby Club.

 

Although the model railway hobby is a somewhat individual hobby, there are still lots of opportunities to share and collaborate with fellow enthusiasts, as in clubs, meetings, shows and of course most important here, the internet.

The intended layout is OO, size 5,15 x 3,95m, Piko H0 code 100 and Peco H0, code 75 track. It is as much as possible 'prototypical'.
It respresents Wateringbury Railway Station, the Stone Lock Railway Bridge and Beltring & Branbridges Halt, at the Medway Valley Line (period 1945 - 1960) with steam engines of the Southern Railway.

 

More info and more images on the website/blog via this link:

https://medwayvalleyline.wordpress.com/

 

Grzz, Hans

 

mvlsmall.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Joseph,

 

Thanks...

 

As Dutchman I have of course a lot of continental H0 stuff. It would be a shame not to use it.

The layout parts at the Bridge or Beltring & Branbridges Halt are almost totally green and rural. So it would be possible to ride Dutch trains there.

At Wateringbury Railway Station on the other hand it is not possible to do so.

So, when I use the Dutch ones, the trains go behind the station.

 

Where I use H0 trains the track will be Piko/Hornby code 100.

On the Wateringbury part however the track will be SMP Bullhead and Peco material code 75.

 

You will understand that in no way the Dutch and British trains will be used at the same time.

 

Grzz, Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

@John,

 

Feel free to give comments, tips and trics.
What is your email adress.
I am experimenting in making trees with Myrica Gale. Instead of making a metal wire frame I use this natural material.
I am not satisfied yet, but it's a very fast method.

I send you my email adress

Grzz, Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I made the table parts for Beltring & Branbridges and the connection between the "bridge" and Wateringbury.

from an old Ikea Ivar Bookcase I made an underframe. The tabletop is on 90cm.

 

bbleeg.jpg

 

For the traverser I made with my son a case from MDF

 

traverserkast.jpg

 

And in the corner I made the first track. I use here Hornby Curved points and Piko A flex code 100.

As you can see I used double-sided tape to fix the tracks.

 

wb_lv.jpg

 

Grzz, Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you want to build a realistic track layout, you have to deal with several issues. It’s not as easy to go to your hobbyshop and buy some RTR railway tracks in 4mm scale. Well you can buy the stuff of the well known firms as Peco, who is by far the market leader in the UK. But to do a good job, it’s more complex…
 
img_1646.jpg
 
On my website/blog I explain how I find a smart, cheap and well looking solution for a 4mm scale bull head track code 75.
See for more information my blog: https://medwayvalleyline.wordpress.com/category/track/
 
Grzz, Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting solution that I hadn't seen before. Have you considered buying C&L flextrack (the code 75 bullhead) and using it with Peco turnouts? The flextrack is much easier to work with than laying all the rail and chairs one by one (usually people only do this at or near pointwork and crossings). Using the flextrack could get the appearance you strive for without any labor or fiddling about with tweezers. :)

 

Coachman here on RMWeb does that and the combination looks quite good. Link to Coachman's thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/98338-exgwr-to-ellesmere-north/

 

It's a good option if one dislikes handlaying turnouts. Personally I enjoy handlaying turnouts; it's quite relaxing and even fun at times. While said turnouts are by no means perfect I'm glad I put in the effort to do it.

 

The only possible downside to using C&L is that I've heard larger flanges hit the chairs. I only say because you mentioned using Piko Code 100 in the areas where your Dutch and continental stock will run; and older continental stock especially has larger flanges. Though if you limit C&L to the main station section of the layout (you also said you wouldn't run your Dutch trains through that area) it could work okay. 

 

Quentin

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Quentin,

 

Actually my club fellow member RudyB (also here on the RMweb), was working on his layout at the same time of my experiment. He was grumbling on the Peco track. He injured his hands several times because the rail doesn't easily moved through the sleepers. In case of the Piko A it's a question of seconds. But you are right it's functioned well for the British stuff - not for some Dutch or continental stock.

 

I use a curved track because of the extra handicap.

 

This Hornby Mausell coach ride smooth over the rails.

 

hornbyce.jpg

 

But I tried also an old Jouef coach of more than 30cm on the track.

 

jouefce.jpg

 

That was absolutely not a success. His huge flanges hit the chairs. It is going like a rocking horse with pizza cutters as wheels. :)

 

Grzz, Hans 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't comment on the signalling, but I do think that the up starter (#1) needs to be moved to a more convenient location. Right now its location severely shortens the usable length of the platform. How long are your platforms going to be? They look a bit short on the layout plan above, even without considering the signal. The down platform seems adequate but the up platform looks like it will only take a loco and two coaches (due to the starter).

 

Quentin

 

P.S.--What does "Grzz" mean? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Quentin,

 

I just had a discussion with Sierd Jan. We think to reduce the number of semaphores. 2, 4, 5 and 9 can expire.

And nr. 7 is to be move towards the bridge.

 

sb.png

 

The starter nr. 1 is positioned next to the signal post as you can see on this picture from Wateringbury Remembered.

It's easy to extend the up platform to the right. I agree, so you created more room for the trains.

 

Grzz, (slang for greetings), Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think No. 7 would actually be on the other side of the bridge (easier for drivers to see), so you could remove that one if you wanted to.

 

Will they be working semaphores?

 

Quentin

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks a great plan Hans (I spent some time training on the Medway valley and remember the semaphore signalling fairly well).

 

On the signalling, a few suggestions:

 

Signal 8 - assuming the loop is reversible, you will need a signal to indicate permission for a move onto the loop. If this is a freight only loop, then a disc signal is adequate (would more accurately be called a draw/call ahead signal in this case) but it might be more fun to use a smaller semaphore (home) arm under or next to the Home, with a white "S" letter stuck over it, extending above and below the arm.

 

Crossover adjacent to "CP" - if controlled by the signal box, then this also needs shunt signals in both directions (or does CP mean Clipped and Padlocked in this case?).

 

Signal 1 - for the purposes of through freight or passenger trains, the driver will need to know whether to start braking for the Advanced Starter, and as sighting is not available due to the curve, you should have a Distant signal under the Starter.

 

I think you need to plan for a decent sized signal box! When you add up all the levers, including the several facing point lock levers, which are separate to the point levers, and probably four detonator placers (for fog and falling snow) it will be at least a 26 lever frame. if you are planning to run rodding to each point and signal, I would suggest that those beyond the Down end of the station will probably have been motorised by the '60's, so you would only run cables to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, basically my signals plan, based on the pre nationalization situation.  But  because of the available room for the layout, some compromises will have to be made. The distance between the up home & down home and the up distance & down distance signals  5 and 7 is now far too short, so they should be moved, which means they will be no longer on the layout.  As a compromise, you could move  nr  7  in front of  the tunnel, just after Stoneham bridge. The distance to the advanced starters is also fairly short, so perhaps they should be moved offstage as well. (But on second thought, they would look rather nice on stage...) Signal nr 9 wasn't on my plan to begin with...

 

Mike: As the curve doesn't exist on the real railway, I didn't consider the visibility of the advanced starter!

 

Edit: Typo's

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mike,

 

To operate the semaphores and the gates, I want to use servo-motors. Not levers and cables.

Prototypical the operation of the gates is actually manual.

 

I make an exact as possible model of the small signal box of Wateringbury - and there's as I expected simple no room for levers.

The backside of this signal box is from wood without windows. So you are also not able to look inside.

 

Grzz, Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mike,

 

To operate the semaphores and the gates, I want to use servo-motors. Not levers and cables.

Prototypical the operation of the gates is actually manual.

 

I make an exact as possible model of the small signal box of Wateringbury - and there's as I expected simple no room for levers.

The backside of this signal box is from wood without windows. So you are also not able to look inside.

 

Grzz, Hans

 

Hans

 

Sorry -  I meant cosmetic point and signal rodding, as a representation of the real thing, if you are going to add this level of detail, which many UK modellers are now doing. Ratio, amongst others, do some pretty good kits which make this fairly easy now. When people say that on RMWeb, they usually mean this!

 

Although having said that, if you are stonking rich, DCC Concepts now do a working miniature lever frame, which could control all your servo motors via arduinos, but this would probably double the cost of the layout!

 

Is Grzz some kind of wargaming thing, or is it that you are a fan of the Grizzly Meadows band??

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mike,

 

I don't know yet the use of cosmetic wires. Perhaps.... I will study the examples here on the RMweb.

To operate with DCC stuff, you will see in the future that I work as cheap as possible. :)

 

Kind regards, Hans :jester:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...