Rospeath Lane - BR(WR) Engine Shed

A blog by Yan in RMweb Blogs

Followers 11

entries
31
comments
49
views
5,290

Fitting Rospeath Lane v.2 in my car

Entry posted by Yan in Planning April 15

350 views

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/blogs/entry/26349-fitting-rospeath-lane-v2-in-my-car/

Followers 1

At the outset, the primary concern of mine was fitting Rospeath Lane v.2 in my car. Rule 1d of the Scalefour Jubilee Challenge stipulates "The layout has to be portable and capable of being transported by a single car or similar size vehicle and exhibited by two people". I'm surprised it dosen't state that both operators have to be transported in the same car as the layout. As a cost saving exercise for exhibition managers, I feel it would be prudent for both operators to travel with the layout.

The problem I face is Tredethy Wharf fills my car including the passenger seat. I've been relying on help at exhibitions from friends having their own transport. Also Rospeath Lane's footprint is larger than Tredethy Wharf which means there is more to fit in the car. This is why I've been worried about how I might adhere to Rule 1d.

Since committing to the Scalefour Jubilee Challenge, I've almost exhausted the grey cells in working out how to fit Rospeath Lane into the car. I have measured the car boot space and all other nooks and crannies that could be utilised. Then, I spent a lot of time thinking about how to reduce the important clutter around the scenic section of the layout. In this I mean the support structure, lighting frame, control panel, cassette boards with blanking/information panels and tool box along with the all important operators stool for thous quiet moments.

The diagrams below hope to show how I visualise it all fitting in the car, including a couple of small overnight bags for multiple day shows. Hope you can make sense of the drawings...

One way I'll be saving space is to use the storage box tops for the lighting frame. This, along with the back screen, will help to create an enclosed space to minimise external light flooding the layout. I'm also planning to include the control panel within Baseboard 2. The current support structure for Tredethy Wharf has improved the stability at the expense of taking up more space in the car. My concern has been how to create a rigid support structure while reducing it's mass. I may have a solution in two trestles supporting and U girders, the proof being after it's constructed.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/blogs/entry/26349-fitting-rospeath-lane-v2-in-my-car/

Followers 1

0 Comments

Recommended Comments

There are no comments to display.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Blog Information

Rospeath Lane is being built as an entry into Scalefour Society's Jubilee Challenge

JubileeChallengeRules (1).pdf

Layout Back Story

This is a fictional project based on "what if" some proposed railways in the Penzance area were constructed. My thoughts are as follows.

In April and May 1898 two applications were made under the Light Railways Act 1896: one for a route of 21 miles between Penzance and St. Just via Newlyn and Sancreed; the second, a proposal made by the Lands End and Great Western Joint for a 20.5 mile route from Marazion to Sennen also via Sancreed .

The route between Penzance and Newlyn was to be operated by an electric railway running along the quayside and promenade. Steam power along this section was deemed to be too disruptive for the hotels and tourist attractions on route. The line would then be operated by steam between Newlyn and St. Just. The route between Marazion and Sennen would Serve Heamoor (Hea), Sancreed and St.Buryan. Both proposals were rejected with a couple of reasons given being: there was no connection between the two routes at Sancreed; and the mileage of the two routes did not justify two separate administrations.

In November 1898 both proposals were resubmitted with amendments. This time at a local inquiry held in Penzance on the 30th/31st January 1899. The inquiry found in favour of the Penzance, Newlyn and West Cornwall which was duly approved. The record states: “The two schemes were competitive schemes to serve the same district, and were heard together at the local inquiry, The attitude of local authorities and landowners was generally against the Lands End, St Just and Great Western Junction scheme, and in favour of the Penzance, Newlyn and West Cornwall scheme which was accordingly approved. An Order was submitted to the Board of Trade on the 17th May 1899.” (1)

At first I thought, what a pity, but then the approved scheme was not built. What if the decision went the other way especially as the Penzance hoteliers seemed to be against the Penzance to Newlyn section being operated by steam. I would have thought that the electric railway section may have struggled with heavy fish traffic from Newlyn, let alone the complication of changing from steam to electric power for such a short distance. So my thoughts are that the Lands End, St. Just and Great Western junction scheme was approved with a junction at Sancreed for Newlyn. This scheme would require a junction east of Marazion for these lines running west of Penzance.

So looking along the mainline east of Marazion for terrain that might fit my initial plan I came across the area south of Crowlas where Rospeath lane crosses the mainline. Perfect … so I’m proposing the junction would have been east of Marazion level crossing about where the current A394 crosses the mainline

A station with sidings similar to Marazion or Gwinear Road would have been constructed between the junction and Rospeath Lane Bridge. An Engine Shed would have been constructed near Crowlas to serve Penzance, St. Just, Sennen and Newlyn. Then the original engine shed would have been rebuilt and extended in the 1930s by the GWR using loans provided by the Government to relieve unemployment.

This, to me anyway, would make sense that a locomotive shed and storage yards would have been created here rather than Long Rock and Marazion. Traffic generated from the St. Just and Sennen would have included China Clay, fish traffic from Newlyn, along with the seasonal broccoli and potatoes crops. With Marazion having generous sidings to cope with the latter two crops, my thoughts are these sidings would have been located at the new junction in this area rather than Marazion.

*(1) Information taken from the Light Railways Act 1896, 31st December 1899 report.

Sign In