Nearholmer
-
Posts
20,657 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by Nearholmer
-
-
I was up there last summer, and the railway does seem pretty spruce and well run, but every time I thought about the amount of infrastructure involved, the cost of that, and the number of passengers, I kept getting a sinking feeling.
One can only hope that as the inevitable increases in the cost of motoring continue, there will be a slow swing back towards more people using the trains, and fewer using cars, but that in itself poses big questions about the economy of the area, and how dependant that is upon car-borne tourism.
-
1
-
-
It was heavy, only had a single gear, and had no freewheel capability, so the primary means of braking was by using the leg muscles. There was a “spoon brake”, which rubbed on the top of the front tyre, but that was notoriously dangerous to use.
-
2
-
2
-
-
Self explanatory, really.
The venue is very interesting if you ignore all the too modern things in it. Look out for the Starley Rover, the first production safety bicycle, which is near the entrance, and marvel at the leg-strength of Victorians.
-
4
-
1
-
-
9mm ply is about 3.5 to 4.5kg sq metre, depending on quality, so call it 4, and double the actual area to allow for the underlying frame of ply, roughly 6kg.
Which doesn’t sound a lot, but actually becomes quite a devil to handle alone to the size/shape.
I’ve got an 0 gauge layout that has to be dismantled and packed away when the spare room is needed, on White Rose 9mm ply base-boards, two of which are 1000x750 and fold together as a pair. Together, they are really awkward to handle by myself - I can’t lift them direct onto the trestles due to the combination of weight and bulk, so have a routine that raises them in stages (too complex to explain, but it works!).
So ……. I’d think seriously about whether you might be edging towards what is practical to handle alone. Probably OK if there is plenty of space for manoeuvre, but possibly not if space is tight.
The White Rose 9mm boards are truly beautiful quality, and built like the proverbial. For a small 00 BLT I’m doing, which is meant to be super-portable, I’ve used the G&H 6mm boards, and by comparison they are light as feathers. The G&H ply is not only thinner, but much less dense, so not quite as robust, but robust enough for practical purposes. Prior to these two layouts, I’ve always built my own boards, many down the years, some successes in terms of weight/size/portability, some abject failures! The failures have always been on grounds of size/bulk, not sheer weight, incidentally. A 10kg bag of spuds isn’t heavy, but a 10kg model railway layout board would be a serious problem.
-
3
-
-
Mud and wind are certainly major factors currently.
Fortunately, we’ve got a right old mix of soil-types within easy range round here (thanks to where the ice sheets ended in that last ice-age apparently), so since the actual floods subsided a few weeks back, I’ve been able to choose free-draining ground, the chalk woods on the Chilterns, and the Greensand Ridge. I did go on a couple of trundles on the more clayey bits, but came back with about 2kg of mud stuck to the bike each time, so I’m not going that way again until it dries out more!
-
3
-
-
Maybe a day out to The Tate Modern, or the Shakespeare Theatre at Stratford would help, especially because the latter was compared to a jam factory when it was built.
-
2
-
-
Where on the SR is this in the 1960s? I ask, because the installation might already be quite old, or it might be pretty much fresh out of the box.
-
We can’t tempt into any less usual stuff, can we?
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
Or, maybe seat belts were closely based on model “rough-shunt” wagons. There’s a diagram of how to make one in MR&L magazine c1910, and there is also a description of building a rotary interia wagon to make small scale live steam operation more realistic, which is another idea that gets reinvented periodically.
-
1
-
-
It still looks like a big, ponderous thing even in that livery
-
1
-
-
I’ve long thought that much of reality is rather overrated, and that even “the best” model railways require so much self-delusion to make them seem realistic when seen in the flesh, that I sort of don’t prize “realism” all that highly. Sometimes, I think that evocation does the job just as well, if not better.
-
13
-
2
-
-
Brilliant magazine, which covers both very interesting prototypes, and some very stylish modelling.
When I was into NG, I subscribed, and had every edition up to maybe some date in about 2018.
The other magazine to consider is Narrow Gauge & Shortlines Gazette, the much older US equivalent of this and NG&IRM, which I suspect inspired both to some degree.
i hope that selling it proves to be a good decision commercially, because it does deserve to be better known.
Next challenge must be to find and import an equivalent Japanese publication, because quirky NG modelling is a very popular thing there, but only gets very occasional exposure here. All three mags mentioned above have carried articles by Japanese modellers over the years, but there is a sort of untapped (by people who don’t speak Japanese) well of craft and aesthetic there. Victors imported a couple of Japanese books of photos of NG layouts way back in the late-1970s, but I’ve seen nothing since.
-
5
-
-
55 minutes ago, cctransuk said:
that broken nose
The name of an entire family of SNCF loco designs, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nez_Cassé-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:
68s ugly?
Is that what it is. I’ve seen them about on the railway, I think even ridden behind (or in front) of them on Chiltern, but wasn’t even moved to google them. -
1 hour ago, Harlequin said:
I’m a bit suspicious of Peco’s diagram
TBH, having slavishly followed it, I’m becoming suspicious of Peco’s diagram myself now!I’ve fixed the unifrog double-slip down, so can’t look at the underside to see whether that offers any useful clues, but viewing it from above, thinking what must be connected to what, and “dabbing out” with a continuity tester, which confirms my thinking, I now can’t see why all, indeed any of, those rail-breaks are necessary for “live frog operation”, any more than they are for “dead frog”.
The only reason I can see for having rail-breaks is for sectionalisation if using straight DC with more than one controller in use on the layout (e.g. Up and Down Road controllers on a double-track circuit), and even more so if “cab control” is being used to switch sections between controllers, and I’m beginning to think that Peco have given instructions based on that case, just in case that is what someone is doing, rather than a long list of ifs, buts and maybes that could lead to confusion ….. it seems to be a sort of worst-case wiring diagram.
Thoughts?
-
1
-
-
In a tense contest today, a panel of expert judges attempted to decide which of the finalists would take home the coveted crown as “Britain’s Ugliest Diesel Locomotive”.
So close was the ballot that the chairman, Sir Vernon Windbag-Aesthete, was forced to use his casting vote, declaring: “My decision is that that thing on the right, whatever is, is the winner, because whoever designed it clearly made a stupendous effort to achieve extreme unpleasantness, right down to the clever way in which the livery is used to emphasise its worst features, which is a stroke of genius. It almost hurts to look at it, which is perhaps the highest accolade that I can bestow.
The runner-up is undoubtedly a very strong contender indeed, but doesn’t quite reach the heights, because it conveys a slight impression that it’s ugliness is more the result of omission, that the designer simply couldn’t be bothered to make it beautiful, than of deliberate design decisions, although I do appreciate that stupefying dullness is a worthy quality in itself.”.
The winning locomotive will now go on to compete against machines from all over Europe, including the renowned former Eastern Bloc classes that have made such a strong showing in previous years.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
5
-
-
TBH, I would always ensure that “frogs” are live, and switched via proper contacts, not fortuitous contact at switchblades, on all point-work. It’s not difficult to achieve, and it puts one more thing in the finely-poised balance in favour of the trains doing what you want them to do, when you want them to do it!
-
2
-
-
May bro has sent me this, of CH at its moodiest, taken as he was walking his dog this morning, trying to dodge an impending downpour.
-
14
-
-
Back to “live frogging” the double-slips for a moment:
This is the diagram provided by Peco (including typo that says it’s a single-slip!):
I think the need to insulate all the rails must be dictated by how the various bits of metalwork in the centre of the assembly are fed, and the need to avoid passing short-circuits between wing-rails and opposite polarity running rails being caused by wheels, but I’ll have to peer at it, and draw a diagram, to be sure.
If what Peco are instructing is truly necessary, and not a bit of excess caution on their part, the insulating gaps/joiners need to go in at track-laying stage if future “live frogging” is contemplated.
-
Now you ask, I realise that I have no idea!
Starting with shows in the scout hut opposite infant school, I’ve been going to MR exhibitions under my own steam “forever”, and if “big” means London, I can’t actually remember when I first went to Central Hall, just thatvitcwascunvomfortably busy, which made seeing things a real difficulty.
-
1
-
1
-
-
That I get. But, if you connect them to the rest of the railway, no insulating gaps, and then later implement “frog switching”, won’t conditions exist where the section of rail adjacent to the frog ends up at the wrong polarity.
I’m not at home at the moment, so can’t study the turnouts or the instructions to be certain, so I’ll look closely later. It’s the double-slip that I’m thinking of particularly, but the concern may apply to all (no, it doesn’t apply to all, only the slip).
-
4 hours ago, Harlequin said:
Unifrog turnouts on DCC: No need for any insulating joiners. Just remember to take the frog wire down through the baseboard when you lay them and then you can decide on/implement the frog switching later
Just for education, since I’m not a DCC user: how does that work? Surely if you don’t leave the rail-breaks, then at a later stage implement switching of the feeds to the frogs, that will create short-circuits? -
A guy I used to work for would get very annoyed about what he called “fart and fly forward” project management (explanation available if required) but as a means of propulsion for crossing a continent it might work quite well.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Ah, those are the things I saw in the shop; I thought they were by DCC Concepts.
Drill bit? 0.75mm I think is what I’ve been using.
Was using the name Oliver Cromwell on a loco controversial at the time?
in UK Prototype Questions
Posted · Edited by Nearholmer
Do some historians portray Cromwell as nothing but a tyrant? If they do, that’s a portrayal very much lacking in nuance, as is the one-liner portrayal of him as the bloke who cancelled Christmas, and their books probably aren’t worth reading. Some of the things that he put in train, notably in Ireland, were tyrannical, but some have acted as very effective protections against the possibility of tyranny, and in some respects he was, oddly enough, very much a liberal by the different standards of his times.
As to whether the naming of the loco was controversial at the time, you’d have to look at newspapers (which often deliberately foment controversy to increase sales of course, so aren’t always a trustworthy guide!), but I doubt that it was significantly so, give the care taken over these things, and the fact that the basic naming scheme for the class was suggested by a prominent churchman, and reflected what might be called an “establishment view” of the world, flavoured with some regional inclusiveness, Cromwell being very much an East Anglian.