Jump to content
 
  • entries
    400
  • comments
    930
  • views
    288,595

Stour Valley in P4, Yard entry built and a new chassis for an old loco

Fen End Pit

Entry posted by Fen End Pit

915 views

 Share

The turnout leading into the yard got laid today, this leads off from the loop back into the double-slip in the yard. Once again I've been able to reclaim the V, switch-blades and tie-bars from the previous layout. The point was built on a copy of the Templot template off the baseboard and then stuck in position on the marks I had previously cut into the cork.

 

blogentry-7212-0-92223900-1477785514_thumb.jpg

 

You'll see various tools sprinkled around the layout. The original box of 'Brook-Smith' gauges, the 10BA bolts which I'm using to solder the rail ends to at the baseboard edges and just showing your truly, a little mirror I use when aligning track. This is a really useful tool when laying track as it allows you to see along the line.

 

The view from the yard shows quite a pleasing line (along with the end of Fen End Pit!)

 

blogentry-7212-0-21271600-1477785529_thumb.jpg

 

Progress on the layout is great, but it isn't the kind of thing you can take out on a Friday evening to work on around a kitchen table. I'd followed Marcus' EHertsGER blog and was most impressed with the chassis he was building for his F4 tank. I'd build one of these in about 1985 (gulp) and had several goes at the chassis, none of which I'd been particularly happy with. The original Gibson sprung hornblocks and absence of any 'turn' on the carrying wheels meant that it was a very poor runner and just couldn't get around curves. I'd rebuilt it firstly with a flexichas beam system, one beam at the front and a pair at the rear. I'd also toyed with attempts to make radial axleboxes before finally settling on a 'phony-truck' as Marcus has done (though I never thought up the name, he should patent that). This version using CSB (Continuous Springy Beam) to provide springing so I will be interested to see how it goes. The quality of the etchings (produced and sold by Rumney Models) is superb.

 

blogentry-7212-0-85398700-1477785539_thumb.jpg

 

The High Level gearbox went together beautifully and the chassis folded up very nicely. In place are the axle jigs, designed to allow the coupling rods to set the position of the hornblock guides.

 

If that wasn't enough I've been drawing up baseboards for the rebuilding of Fen End Pit.

 

David

  • Like 8
 Share

4 Comments

Recommended Comments

Dave Holt

All looking very neat and tidy, including the F4 chassis. It's always a pleasure to work on well crafted kits that go together and fit properly.

If you don't mind me saying so, I keep thinking your goods shed looks a bit narrow, relative to the rail vehicle opening. I seem to recall from an earlier entry that you scaled the building from a map or aerial photo, so I must be wrong about this. It's just a gut feeling.

Best wishes with the layout.

Dave.

Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Fen End Pit
  • RMweb Gold

All looking very neat and tidy, including the F4 chassis. It's always a pleasure to work on well crafted kits that go together and fit properly.

If you don't mind me saying so, I keep thinking your goods shed looks a bit narrow, relative to the rail vehicle opening. I seem to recall from an earlier entry that you scaled the building from a map or aerial photo, so I must be wrong about this. It's just a gut feeling.

Best wishes with the layout.

Dave.

 

Hi Dave

I drew my mockup by counting bricks so I'm pretty sure it is right. The structure is quite narrow when you look at it

http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/clare/index38.shtml

Link to comment
Dave Holt

Yes, you're quite right, it does look quite narrow. I think my idea was tainted by the Delph goods shed for my layout, which was quite enormous for a branch-line terminus station.

I tried to work out the size of a large cotton mill by counting bricks but failed to allow for the mortar thickness. I assume 3 x 1 model brick size and drew it on mm graph paper. The proportions were smack on, but when I later obtained copies of the architects drawings found that my drawing was somewhat under size. I'm sure you haven't made the same error.

Dave.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...