[The Little People]

On 29/02/2024 at 19:04, hmrspaul said:

The mother with two children is such a common site, but I don't believe I have ever seen it modelled before. Mum and Dad with a small child inbetween being swung along would also be a nice design.

 

Paul

 

'1,2,3, wheeeeeee!

 

I have not gone overboard with little people at Cwmdimbath, but could do with a few more than I have, few more sheeps as well!  The thinking is that this is a small mining village with houses close to the station and everyone knows the timetable anyway.  You can certainly hear the train coming as it attacks the last steep pitch past the colliery before the final few yards of level into the station, it being quite difficult to keep the safety valves quiet when the loco eases off at the crest of the gradient and rolls into the platform.  Normal practice is for the fireman to feed the boiler some cold water at this point, which helps, but approach to the terminus is usually noisy.  So the punters respond to the Welsh climate by staying indoors with cups of tea until the train has not only arrived, but run around and set the stock back into the platform, so that they can walk the short distance and get straight into a compartment with the heating bags connected. 

 

So there aren't any passengers waiting on the platform; any on the station are in the waiting room where there is a nice coal fire going.  On the platform, there is the leading railman talking to a footplateman carrying a teacan, who may not actually be on duty yet but travelling down to Tondu to book on, we don't know.  There is also a porter.  The signalbox has a signalman on the phone, and apart from footplate crews and a guard on a van balcony, that's it.  The presence of humanity is suggested by the usual modelling dodges, doors ajar, bicycles leaning against walls, lights on in buildings.  Not enough.

 

Need some humans around the new goods shed area, possibly one or two in the village around Idwal Bracchi's coffee bar and the Post Office/General Store, maybe a couple of housewives gossiping by their front doors, a grease monkey having a crafty fag round the side of Dimbath Motors.  Some workers aound Dimbath Metals, and the Colliery, and a lot more sheeps.  For Valleys sheeps, forget about the plump woolly little clouds pleasantly dotting the fields on Romney Marsh, or the grounds of Hardwicke, think more scrag end of mutton, tough, skinny, unkempt, shifty, anti-social, and with an air of 'street' to them.  They have a degree of low animal cunning; they get everywhere and are accomplished house burglars who know how to open kitchen doors.  Their cousins at Cwmbargoed used to flip the tops of coal wagon axleboxes with their noses to get at the yummy grease inside.  They will stare you down, and if, like me, you are of the view that they are part of a Borg-like collective intelligence plotting the overthrow and enslavement of humanity, there is not much about these characters that will persuade you otherwise, something about the eyes, their soulless, empty, dead, eyes.  'Bleating and babbling we fell on his neck with a scream/wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream (the dream, the dream, the dream, the dream)'.  So I need conspiratorial plotting groups of them, the sort that look away and whistle if a human approaches...

 

Mwa ha ha ha haaa, baa!

 

 

[Starting out again in modelling]

4 feet on the ground, or at least on level and flat railheads, is indeed the key to successful running of these kit vehicles, along with ballasting.  My first action when opening the packet is to check that the floor is not warped, which to be fair in Peco/Parkside's case it never is with current toolings.  Careful dressing of the solebars before fixing them to the underside of the floor and the use of Lego bricks as formers to ensure that the bodyshell is square and true is vital, and as there is no guide to ensuring that the axleboxes are exactly opposite each other, so care must be taken here as well.  The solebar-floor connection is the most important part of the assembly, and the use of a slow-setting adhesive that allows fine adjustment before it is allowed to go off sealing the final postion is advised.  I have a small lady's make up mirror in the toolbox on which I can place wagon chassis and bogies to visually check for level by observing the reflection of the bottom of the wheels, and this is of course level so is good to test for any rocking.

 

I have Parkside vans that have been running on the layout for over six years with no sign yet (fingers crossed) of warping or going out of true, but have had trouble with Dapol Kitmaster kits, especially a Meat Van which I was very happy to replace with a Hornby...  I assume this is down to the plastic used, as my old Airfix minerals from back in the day ran well enough for years...  Chivers Finelines have supplied me with two long wheelbase van, an LNER 'Pigeon' BY and an LMS 6-wheel CCT (actually 4-wheel with a dummy centre wheelset), both of which have been running for several years and have retained their squareness. 

[Cheddar P4 - December 2023 update]

There were certainly livery anomalies aplenty during the early BR transition, and they lasted for some time in traffic, because of several factors; the austerity economy meant that paint of the correct type was not available and what was to hand was used (though this was more common with goods stock), instructions were misinterpreted, perhaps sometimes deliberately (see the Riddles Paddington story), and different paint shops may have interpreted them differently as well. 

 

To take an example, W3338 was the last Clifton Downs compartment driving trailer in service.  It was originally withdrawn in 1947 in wartime brown livery, but re-instated in 1951, and given a one-off crimson lined livery not dissimilar to the later lined maroon, but with simpler lining.  Add to the mix a few cream-painted droplights from carriage shed spares to replace lights broken in service, and by the time it was withdrawn for the second and final time in 1955 it was breaking all sorts of livery rules, a product very much of the times! 

 

But I've never heard of blood'n'custard non-gangwayed stock.  Hornby, however, at one time released non-gangwayed shorty clerestories in this livery in a train set with a B12, presumably intended to represent GER coaches, and may have had some actual prototype of which I am not aware in mind when they did so; even their most odd stuff usually has some basis in reality, albeit sometimes tenuous, no matter how inaccurate the actual model is...

[Cheddar P4 - December 2023 update]

TTBOMK. D116s never carried crimson/cream livey, but my knowledge of this subject is not inexaustible, and I'd be intereseted in any examples of non-gangwayed WR stock that did.  Crimson/cream was theoretically to be used for gangwayed stock, but in practice auto-trailers painted between 1948 and 1950 were given it (the story, and for all I know it might be true, was that Mr Riddles saw one while passing through Paddington about his business in 1950 and enquired what his best main-line livery was doing on a lowly auto-trailer, at which point the practice ceased and the plain crimson livery was used) and some gangwayed NPCCS was painted in plain crimson.

 

What should have happened was that any D116 set painted between 1/1/48 and 31/5/48 should have been painted in 1947 GW livery with no crest of other indication of ownership, and W prefixed numbers in GW script.  1/6/48-1956 should have been painted BR plain crimson with straw Gill Sans numbers and lettering, but some stock had Gill Sans while in GW choc/cream early 1948 BR version of GW 1947 livery; I couldn't say if any of these were D116s. 

 

But not crimson/cream AFAIK.

[Calne to Hungerford – a missing link in Eastern Wiltshire]

A fully loaded wagon of the standard length, rated 10 tons, 12 for some modern opens and vans, is capable of carrying a 10ton load, the load for engine haulage purposes being calculated on this figure plus the wagon/van's tare (empty, just the vehicle weight, say 6tons for an open or 8 for a van.  Rounding up to be on the right side and in consideration that the Swindon figure of 500tons for a 2884 (we can assume that figures for the Stanier 8Fs and the proposed new Riddles engines will be about the same), and that Swindon's quoted speed of 20-30mph will be an average on relatively level double track main lines where there are less stops for passing purposes, we can work on a very generalised rough figure of close to 20tons for a fully-loaded four-wheel wagon or van.  That equates to 25 standard wagons for a fully loaded train of 500tons trailing, well within the suggested 45-wagon length limit.  But it is not as simple as that, because the wagons, or at least an equivalent number may well be required to return empty to the original loading point for another load with the usual urgency requested for war supplies.

 

In order to save paths on this single track route, it will be advisable to return trains of empty vehicles weighing 6 or 8 tons in twice the quantity that loaded ones were supplied, that is, 50 empty wagons for around 400 tons, within the engine's capacity and representing a good utilisation of them, but more than the suggested 45 wagon length limit.  Another point is that not all wagons/vans will necessarily be fully loaded in terms of the weight of the load; a military truck takes the same sized wagon to carry it as a tank, but weighs much less, for example.  I have no difficulty in imagining 60 wagon trains being required to make the best use of paths, locos, and crews, all of which are not available in limitless quantities.

 

It would also be advisable in my view to consider that Mr. Churchill has promised final victory, albeit at the cost of blood, soil, sweat, and tears, and I believe him despite the fact that he is fundamentally a politician and my family has roots in Tonypandy, and strongly-held views regarding him.  Therefore, we should, to whatever extent is possible, consider how our line will be used after hostilities cease.  It will likely become another  bucolic backwater and it's glory days of 2-8-0s and 60-wagon fast freights will be over, but it will still occasionally be needed as a diversionary route, especially on Sundays when engineering occupations require diversions to keep traffic running.  In that event, as 60 wagons trains are normal on both the Bristol and West of England main lines, my suggestion is that we should do our utmost to persuade the War Department to fund facilities for 50-wagon trains trains at the very least and ideally 60-wagon in the interests of facilitating the war effort as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible. 

 

Our enemy will have to have access to Middle Eastern, Asian and North African oilfields if he is to succeed, otherwise we will eventually starve him out and impair his ability to continue fighting this sort of mechanised war, depending as it does on continuous supplies of oil and steel.  Luckily for us, North African oilfields are guarded by that strutting ineffective fool Mussolini, for now anyway, and our Middle Eastern forces should be able to deal with him and his surrendering armies.  Logistics will be the final victor, gentleman, not an honourable way to fight but his atrocities have laid down the rules of engagement, and if needs must we must fight dishonourably to win.  Mr. Churchill has American associations and may be able to use them to our logistical advantage.  He has already facilitated the escorting of our convoys by American warships within their territorial waters, and Roosevelt seems sympathetic to our cause.  America understandably wishes to remain out of the conflict, though, and unless they are directly attacked, say by Japan, an unlikely prospect, will remain so.  We must use what resources we have to the best possible advantage!

 

Germany is a an industrially powerful, well supplied, and well organised enemy, albeit a deluded one, and we need to take him on on the industrial production front as well as in ships, aircraft, and tanks.  In order to do this we should, in general, be concious of inefficiency and wastage of fuel, facilities, and manpower and limit to whatever extent is within our ability, and hope that he is less so.  His leader is a megalomaniac who will promote expensive and impractical projects with nobody being able to gainsay him, and this is perhaps his greatest weakness; let us resolve not to join him!  It is this argument that should be put to the War Department if they gib at increased costings!

 

In addition to that consideration but still on the subject of peacetime use, it would be more than likely that one or more of the military establishments served by it will remain in use.  Our desire for peace led to the failed policy of appeasment, and us being very nearly caught napping this time, and we will be in no mood to repeat that mistake, or that of being held to ransom by a U-boat blockade!  Other enemies may yet arise, and they will have long-range bombers and maybe weapons of speed and power we have not yet imagined, so we will still need defensive and training airfields.  Perhaps the glory days will be recalled occasionally with trains of materiel  and personel destined for these establishments, which will require supplies, victualling, aviation spirit, and more.

[Calne to Hungerford – a missing link in Eastern Wiltshire]

The loop as drawn at the moment is about 300yds, and will accommodate a 45-wagon train of standard sized wagons.  More planning is needed to see if a) the loop can be extended, or b) shorter trains are acceptable.  45 fully laden wagons is probably close to what even a big 8-coupled engine can comfortably manage on some of our gradients anyway, given that some of the trains may well be carrying urgent war materiel and speeds of around 40 or 50mph may be desirable.

 

Incidentally, clearances at platforms and such should be arranged for 70' coaches, as these are used on the main lines that our line will no doubt be used as a diversionary route to.

 

On the subject of engines, the ROD locos mentioned earlier may not be the best choice for fast war traffic.  They are based on a design by Robinson for the old Great Central line, and chosen as a war standard during the Great War.  They proved themselves robust and easy to maintain in difficult conditions supplying the Western Front, but are best suited to heavy mineral haulage at lower speeds; indeed, this is the role that the GW deploys them into.  I think we will want engines that can run faster if needed and are fitted with vacuum brake equipment, as there is a considerable military presence on our route and very little public transport in the way of passenger trains or buses.  In short, gentlemen, we are going to need to run troop trains as well as war supplies.

 

The GW will be able to provide suitable engines; they are, I believe, currently engaged in building a batch of the 2884 class of 2-8-0s, a vacuum brake fitted type known to be capable of 60mph.  Keep it under your hat, loose lips sink ships and all that, but some private locomotive building companies are reputed to be involved in building 2-8-0s of the LMS Stanier 8F type, of similar capacity to the 2884s, and while these are probably inteneded for overseas service as the type has been accepted as the current war standard for this conflict, no doubt some will be made available to the GW to alleviate any shortages pending their deployment to battle zones. 

 

Again, keep it under your hats, but I understand from my contacts in the Ministry of Supply that Mr Riddles of the LMSR, an assistant to Mr Stanier, has been approached to draw up a new type of locomotive based on the leading dimensions of the 8F design but configured for cheap & rapid construction, and ease of servicing and maintenance in battle conditions, and that a ten-coupled variant has also been requested, the biggest ever seen in Britain.  Should this plan come to fruition, I foresee the use of such engines on our line, in the same way as the WD 8Fs

 

So, I would envisage 2884s and War Department Stanier 8Fs doing the heavy goods work on our line.  Any other through traffic will be handled by the GW's 43xx or the 'Hall' or 'Grange' classes, though for shorter runs the big prairie tanks of the 3150 class may be suitable.  I am not sure what we have in mind for any local passenger trains, but imagine these will be worked by whatever spare locos and stock are available at Chippenham and possibly Newbury, so you might see almost anything pulling any old coaches.  'Auto trains' already work on the Calne branch, and may well be suitable for runs out as far as Avebury Jc to connect with trains on the N&SW line, but are probably a bit limited in 'range' further than that. 

 

I would also mention the use of 'auto' coaches with 'normal' engines on the Lambourn branch line, serving very similar downland country.  This is because of a number of ground level stations that require their retractable step access, but the branch is too long and the peacetime horsebox traffic too heavy for auto engines to be used.  Would this approach be suitable for some locations on our line?

 

 

Local goods traffic could be accommodated with simple mileage sidings at suitable locations, as I am sure that the local farmers will wish to avail themselves of this facility and it will aid the war effort in the sense that the more food that we can grow within the country and deliver fresh to the populace in the cities, the less will need to be imported by sea, where it is at peril from the U-boat menace.  Merchant shipping losses are heavy despite the convoy system and the Royal Navy escorts, though this is not widely reported for reasons of public morale.  This is causing concern as the enemy is starting to terror-bomb the big cities.  Some of the downland farms are quite remote except for the presence of our railway, and may be best served by short mileage sidings accessed by ground frames.  I do not envisage goods sheds or other facilities being needed, except perhaps at Avebury Jc, the 'hub' of the area, but end-loading docks at stations or at the ends of the aforementioned mileage sidings can cater for such of that sort of traffic as is demanded, and of course livestock handling.

 

Gentlemen, things look a little bleak at the moment as we stand alone against the enemy, but we stood against the Armarda, and we stood against Napoleon.  I am certain that we will give Mr. Hitler a well-deserved and thorough thrashing that he will never forget, and if this project aids that final victory that Mr. Churchill promises us, then it will have been worthwhile. 

[Calne to Hungerford – a missing link in Eastern Wiltshire]

'60 wagons' means a length equivalent to sixty ordinary wagons or vans with nine or ten foot wheelbases, around sixteen or seventeen feet in length overall.  Obviously, longer wagons with longer wheelbases, or bogie vehicles, will reduce the number of vehicles overall in a train for the purposes of being accommodated in the passing loops, and for signalling safety overlap clearance purposes.  Should the loop proposed for Calne (on one of the sausage platform roads, I note) be of insufficient length to serve this purpose, allowing for a locomotive, possible assisting locomotive, and the brake van, I would suggest that the loop be extended eastwards; it is possible that more land will need to be requisitioned for this purpose. 

 

As a rule of thumb, '60 wagons' equates to twenty bogie coaches in length, 1,200 feet or 400 yards.  This is less than a quarter of a mile, but not significantly so; without measuring it out on the ground, which could arouse suspicion of my being a fifth columnist in these 'interesting' times, I suspect that the proposed Calne loop, and possibly others, may need to be extended.

[The North & South Wiltshire Railway – N&SWR - (Swindon to Salisbury)]

4 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Invitation to the First Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the N&SWR

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

The Directors of the N&SWR have graciously instructed me to forward your nomination to join the Board of Trustees of the N&SWR. You have been nominated as a trustworthy and reliable person with knowledge of Wiltshire (and other) rural branch line railways. 

 

Your duties would simply be to suggest whatever improvements and/or alterations to the N&SWR that you may see fit to mention.

 

Your earliest advice is sought on which locomotives, coaches, horse boxes, cattle wagons and general rolling stock will be appropriate for the N&SWR.

 

Yours sincerely

Wilkins Micawber

Assistant Secretary of the N&SWR

RSVP

 

Copy to  @CME and Bottlewasher, @Northmoor, @The Johnster, @Ramblin Rich, @Miss Prism, @Mikkel, @Oldddudders, @Compound2632, @Northroader,

 

 

I am highly honoured to be able to accept this nomination, especially as I will be amongst such august and respected company.  I will refrain from suggesting specific improvements until I have familiarised myself futher with the details of the scheme, but would take this opportunity to repeat my comments regarding length and bi-directional signalling of passing loops on the Calne & Hungerford, and suggest that 'double red' route availability is possibly overkill for this scheme, as it is doubtfull that the sort of diverted traffic I envisioned on the C & H, involving Kings and 47xx, will be needed here.  The joint station will have to be constructed to this specification, though, and it seems only fair that the C & H is responsible for paying for the formation and any bridges that need to be capable of carrying such locomotives; AFAICS only a culvert towards the southern end of the proposed joint station passing loop on the N&SWR is concerned.

 

 

[A Pannier of mixed parentage - GWR 1854 PT (2)]

I have a Wills 1854 in need of tlc, given me by Philou of this very parish as ever is, bothering me in my 'get a round tuit one day' pile.  Needs a good bit of chopping about to remove the boiler/undertank skirts, and as my intended prototype (1740, last half-cab pannier at Tondu, wd September 1950) had fishbelly rods, a Baccy chassis will do the do.  It's predecessor was a Hornby 2721, worked up in the usual way with a Baccy 57xx chassis (now back under it's donor 57xx), whitemetal buffers, a chimney, dome, and safety valve cover that originated a very long time ago on a Westward 64xx, but quantum better than the Hornby items, real coal, and a messy attempt to move the centre splashers.  I could not get the Baccy chassis to sit under it without cutting a hole at the firehole doors for the worm to sit in.  I eventually gave up on it because I couldn't come to acceptable terms with the overlength bunker, made worse by the overhang; 1740 did not have this at Tondu. 

 

Maybe sometime this year.  Green 1942-7 G W R initials livery, and I will have to source suitable 'grotesque' lettering to represent a Caerphilly-painted engine, which also needs a red-painted reversing lever.  The real engine finished it's career as a yard pilot around Tondu and it is debatable that it would ever have been allowed out into the mountain fastnesses of somewhere like Cwmdimbath, but Rule 1 will give it an occasional such outing.  I like these half-cab panniers, more so than the saddle versions, sorry Mikkel!  I rather doubt the crews saw it my way; she must have been a right bag of nails in her declining years!

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

I’ve found my first mistake!  Hopefully rectifiable; the next move is to insert piece of wire through the small holes in the frame ahead of the cylinder support box and between the axles at the same level, leaving enough sticking out each side to trim to hold the tops of the brake assemblies.  But sum dam fule🥴, guess who, has covered the rh front hole with solder when he was doing the cylinder support box.  
 

I’ll try to redrill the hole later!

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

i actually wrote that last night but didn’t post it for some reason.  I think I probably meant coupling rods not cuopling rods, though…

 

I’ve had a squiz at the instructions, and while the next job in them is indeed to make up the coupling and connecting rods, it is much later in the proceedings that wheels and axles come into play.  There is finishing off work on the chassis to do, the motion inspection covers and the internal motion, the valve gear representation between the frames, and it makes more sense to do these jobs and the gearbox/motor assembly first.  I am not comfortable with taking the rods off the fret until they are needed, as I am afraid of losing them. 
 

If I can save time and effort by using the Dapol wheelsets and motion, I will; there is nothing wrong with it and I’m not building the kit in EM or P4.  I might even be able to employ the Dapol keeper plate, which will sort the pickups and what looks like an admittedly finely detailed but probably highly fiddly brake gear assembly with plenty of discrete and tiny parts of the sort specifially designed to drive The Johnster nuts, or at any rate more nuts than he already is…

 

So I’ve decided that the best way to proceed for me is to finish the chassis and tick that off job done without taking the rods off the fret, not yet anyway.  After that I’ll start dismantling the Dap chassis and seeing what, if any, of it can be used.  

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

Having had a rest from the High Level coalface, I had another look at it tonight.  Only did one thing, next on the list, part 18 the cylinder support bracket.  Not rocket science even by my standards, a fairly straightforward foldup box shape with wing tabs to solder into slots in the front of the side frames.  You have to ensure that the top of the piece is level, but it sat level naturally in the slots, and so long as something is restraining the frame at the rear and the support bracket at the front so it stays where it is while you are poking it about with the soldering iron, there shouldn’t be much problem and there wasn’t.

 

 

It looks like this when you’ve done it, note that the bottom edge slopes downwards to the rear to match the angle of the cylinders.  
 

The next part is to make up the cuopling rod and drill out the crankpin holes in them, but I need to do a bit of instruction reading before I start that sort of shennigans, so no more for tonight!

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

Cleaning up the inner protrusions of the bearings was only a few minutes work, filing the burrs away mostly.  It occurred to me that there was no need to cut the protruding bearings for the front axle, only the rear ones for gearbox clearance, but the securest way to hold the workpieces in the vices made it easier to hacksaw the front and rear bearings together anyway.  
 

So the next task was to fit the frame spacers.  These are tabs on the spacers and slots in the frames.  Starting at the front, which has to be folded along a fold line, and because it could stand up on it’s own while I soldered it in position; the instructions say to fit to the left frame, but I can’t see what difference it makes.  The next is the middle spacer, actually well towards the front just for’ard of the front axle; this was where the fun began.  Try as I might I couldn’t get the spacer to stay still while I soldered it.  The solution, it eventually dawned on me, was to weigh it down with something on top; what was to hand was the b2b. 
 

 

This did the trick; on to the rear spacer, mounted horizontally under wher the cab will go.  This was even fiddlier, and the big guns were called for…

 

 

 

On a roll, now, offer up the rh frame piece.  Of course, nothing lined up, and a bit of gentle benderising persuasiveness ensued, but we got ther eventually. 
 

 

Look, a chassis frame!  I’m a proper modeller after all, bask in my glory RTR peasants; oh, hang on a minute, it’s all a bit out of square and a little twisted.  Out with that 1/8th shaft screwdriver again to see if we can use it as a guide; it should turn reasonably freely when the alignment is correct and can be used as a fine-tuning guide to square things off.  And give you a bit of leverage for the benderising!
 

 

It worked!  Ok, don’t get carried away, that’s enough for tonight, well done Johnster you’ve earned the bottle of Newcastle Brown in the fridge.  Not going to do any more to it tomoz, having a chillax operating sesh instead.  But this isn’t as easy as the instructions suggest when you’re used to simple plastic construction kits.  Each instruction so far as thrown up situations in which you must work out for yourself how to carry out; ‘solder spacers to lh frame then solder rh frame to assembly’, for example, does not give much guidance when it comes to

holding things that repeatedly fall over, or how to ensure square and aligned bearings for food running without binding. 
 

This is of course all part of the fun and working things out for yourself adds to the satisfaction, and the feeling of achievement if you manage to get a good smooth slow runner at the end of it.  But so far it’s not been difficult (wait ‘til I get to the miniscule details of the brake rigging!).  Faffy, pushing the limits of Johnster’s ingenuity and problem-solving capacity, yes, but not (yet anyway; it’s still early doors) difficult. 

 

   

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

 

Two frames, bearings fitted, and the protrusions hacksawed off with a junior hacksaw with the pieces secured in the vice.  I’ve cleared the swarf and debris from the bearings and tryfitted a 1/8th dia. rod, actually a screwdriver shaft of that size; all seems well.  The hacksaw made fairly clean cuts through the brass bearings, and the cleaning up of these surfaces with a file will be much less work than I’d feared. You can see where the side of the saw blade has polished the nickel-silver of the frame pieces, which acted as a guide for the saw, and a cleaning up session will still be needed; if there is any lumpiness to affect the fit of the gearbox, smooth running, which is the root object of the exercise, will be compromised!
 

So I’m quite pleased with myself; matters are proceeding much as I thought they should, and while I’m not running to time because there isn’t a timetable, I’m where I thought I should be at the present time.  

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

Thank you for this good advice, my West British friend, especially the file-toothed piercing saw.  The internal surface of the bearings is pretty good as is, and won't need any work unless the axles are a tight fit; haven't try-fitted them yet and am working on the assumption that all shall be well and all manner of things shall be well, which might be risky, so a tryfit will be done next session.  The reaming was of the bearing holes in the frames, which are deliberately made undersize by HL and you are instructed to open them out until the bearings fit, presumably to ensure a good fit.  As I said, I did this 'little bit at a time' until they just fitted and soldered them.  I'm a little concerned that my solder joints will fail under the stress of sawing and filing, but they feel pretty solid; I am thinking that it would do no harm to reinforce them with a dab of runny superglue to capilliarise into the joint all the same.

 

I like the idea of the lubrication channel, though, and a brief hand twirl with a 1/8th drill followed by a cleaning up will do no harm either, but I'll tryfit the axles first to get a feel for how they run in the bearings.  This will ultimately be a compromise, as they must run freely but not loosely.  But a perfect fit will be prone to stiffness as a result of temperature changes, won't it?, as we are deaing with a steel axle running in a brass bearing fixed in a nickel-silver frame, and all of those metals presumably expand and contract at differing rates when the temperature changes, so there will have to be some play, but it must be minimal

 

I am particularly aware of what expansion and contraction can do on a layout after my teenage attic layout, in an attic insulated (not) for the purpose by Buffalo Bill Attic Conversions PLC, aka my old man, bodgerigar extraordinaire; the layout tore itself to pieces.  In reality I'm prolly worrying too much, as the layout is within the living area of the flat and reasonably cool in summer/warm in winter, and I've never experienced any such issue with it, but the mental scars of the teenage disaster are still there...

 

Probable session on this later this evening, as the other frame needs it's bearings fitting and then I'll do the tryfitting and fettling before attacking the protrusions.  That'll prolly be enough for tonight, but I'd like to have it sorted so as to clear my head for the frame spacers, which sound more like a weekend job!  I think these should be fairly straightforward, with much less fettling and filing, but that looks like famous last words even as I type it...  The issue here will be to ensure that the spacers are at proper right angles to the frames, and the axle bearings align with each other.  On buildings and wagon kits I use Legos (plastic bucket full of your choice from Lego shop in town, £6, excellent value and useful for all sorts of formwork, recommended) to ensure this, but I doubt there'll be room for this dodge in this case

 

Onwards and upwards, or at least diagonally and sideways!

[A High Level pug for Cwmdimbath Colliery]

I think the trick, if there is one, is to do things methodically one step at a time, even if that means one task at a time, then to step back from the job for some thinking time before starting the next task.  It’s not a race, and if it takes me a year to complete I’ll be happy.  Next task  will be the frame cross-members; the kit offers 00, EM, and S4 but this task isn’t finished yet; as I’m working in 00 I’ll need to trim and file the protruding parts of the rear axle bearings down flush with the inside face of the frames first, to provide clearance for the gearbox, which is I suspect going to be time-consuming and frustrating.  They protrude about 1.5mm, and I may be able to get the bulk of the metal off with a slitting disc; the instructions say to file them down, which feels like it’s going to be onerous. 
 

But now I’ve started, I intend to take my time but keep momentum.  Thank you for the good karma, longchap, and if my efforts help you to take Confucius’ single step with your Metro, I’ll be delighted, so I’m sending as much good karma your way in return!

 

ATB, mon captain.  

 

[Rhymney Railway K Class 0-6-2ST/0-6-2PT]

The boiler explosion occurred at Cardiff East Dock shed, the situation not immedieately apparent but brought to light when the driver prepping the loco for duty reported a non-functioning steam pressure gauge; what had actually happened was that the pressure had risen to the extent that the needle was bearing hard against the '0 psi' stop from the other side!!!  The loco's dome was found at Adamsdown Cemetery on Moira Terrace, now Cemetery Park, nearly a mile away.

 

The Rhymney's very attractive passenger livery at this time was based on the Great Central's, because the CME, Hurry-Riches (his brother held the same post on the Taff Vale) had worked at Gorton before taking up the job on the Rhymney.  It would be reasonable to assume that the shade of green was the same.

 

The GW rebuilt Rhymney K class was indeed the only 0-6-2PT, at least in the UK, and the only 0-6-2 with outside frames on the GW.

[A Pannier of mixed parentage - GWR 1854 PT (1)]

I have a Hornby 2721, representing Tondu's 2761 in her final condition as withdrawn from Tondu in 1950, which I have worked up a bit by replacing the Hornby chimney and safety valve cover with spares from a scrap Westward 64xx that had been replaced with a Baccy RTR.  It has a Baccy 57xx chassis, and I have learned to live with the minor mismatch of wheels and splashers, only really apparent in a direct broadside on view.  The chimney on the Hornby is that shape to allow release from the mould, apparently, but there is little excuse for the upturned flower pot that does duty as the safety valve cover.  Any other view than 90 degree broadside is 'incorrect' anyway on a 00 model because of the gauge issue, please, everyone, this is not an invitation to re-open that debate...

 

Your comments about the bunker length are interesting, as I have also been given (courtesy Philou of this very parish) a Wills I854 in non-running order, which I'd intended to build a new Southeastern chassis for at one time.  Tondu had an 1854, 1740, that outlasted 2761 by almost a year and would be in some ways a better prototype, and having read this, I'm now leaning to making 1740 out of a combination of Hornby and Wills parts on the Bachmann running chassis.  A drawback to 2761 is that the Bachmann 57xx chassis has the plain fishbelly coupling rods that you would expect from a 57xx, and many 2721s ran with such rods in their later lives, but 2761, which I have photographs of on the recep. roads and the dump at Swindon, had straight fluted rods, so the original Hornby chassis was better in that particular regard!  I have no photos of 1740 in her late Tondu condition, so feel justified in including the Baccy coupling rods, and possibly an enclosed cab to conceal the gear intrusion into the cab through the firehole door; on 2761 this is done by the crew and the canvas weather sheet being deployed,  But the bunker is too long, and looks it, and a hybrid Hornby/Wills body might be a way to address this.

 

That said, anyone who brings out either a 2721 or 1854 half cab pannier to current RTR standards will precipitate the immediate abandonment of all this, and the Bachmann chassis can go back under it's original body.

[Rhymney Railway M Class]

Another big difference was the provision of vacuum brakes for passenger working.  The new inside motion was, IIRC, to cope with the cylinders which were the largest inside cylinders used on the GW, and the only inclined ones.  This is what accounts for the very large balance weights on the centre driving wheels on this lock.  One wonders if Collett considered a 5'2" wheeled version, as he has form in the matter of messing about with driving wheel diameters on otherwise similar locomotives (54xx/64xx, 61xx/81xx), but ther were plenty of Taff As about, recently built and very successful with the no.10 boiler that he designed originally for the rebuilds of this class.  It was later used on the 2251, 94xx, and 15xx.

 

The 56xx proved highly successful on Valleys passenger work notwithstanding the smaller driving wheels.  High speeds were not required on Valleys services, as line speeds were low; the Taff was 50mph north of Radyr, as was the whole of the Barry including the Vale of Glamorgan section, and the Rhymney was similarly restricted north of Ystrad Mynach; the Monmouthshire Valleys were hardly racing ground either. 

 

The 56xx, which I am old enough to remember pulling passenger trains, gave a very noticeable piston surge in the leading coaches, especially when pulling away from stations going uphill.  The GW seems not to have been inhibited by wheel size on locos intended for passenger work, with the 44xx going as small as 4'1", which proved a step too far and the small prairies were soon altered to a 4'7" specification.  The 44xx were kept as built though as they found a niche on sharply curved branches, being associated with Princetown, Much Wenlock, and Porthcawl.  This last was speed resticted to 15mph throughout and one particularly wiggly stretch to 5mph for all locos except 44xx, which were turned at Tondu halfway through their daily duties in order to even out the flange wear!

[Rhymney Railway M Class]

Differences between P and M classes were that the Ps had air brakes for passenger working, converted to vacuum post-grouping, with 5' diameter driving wheels, while the Ms had 4'6" drivers and no continuous brakes.  P was to indicate Passenger and M to indicated Mineral versions of the basic Stephenson design, which became a sort of South Wales standard, the Rhymney also using it in the A class and versions being built for the Brecon & Merthyr and the Neath & Brecon.

 

The 56xx class may be considered as a Rhymney M or R Stephenson built out of Swindon standard components. 

[Triang SR bogie luggage van in P4]

All sots of general NPCCS stock got everywhere on BR very quickly after nationalisation, and a ‘GLV’ as I thing the Southern called them is perfectly acceptable.  I’ve been putting off doing something to mine, in 00, as I’ve been mithering myself about the raised lines representing the planking and the roof profile, but it obviously hasn’t bothered you, and the result is more than acceptable, so now I’ve got no excuse.  

[00 track laying - Is it always this difficult!?]

Observations, not to be taken as criticisms and the benefit of having been there, done that, washed the t shirt.  There's nothing wrong with a mistake if you are willing to learn from it...

 

Looking at the photos, the thing that immediately strikes me is that several of your track joints near turnouts are not smoothly laid in respect of adjoining the next piece of track.  This means that stock entering the turnouts, especially from the facing direction, will not 'attack' the crossing vee at the correct angle and be prone to derailment, especially at speed or propelling.  A similar issue is caused by the proximity of the high level trailing crossover to the top of the incline of the 'inner' track, which may cause derailments at the turnout because longer stock my 'lift' a little.  Buffer locking may be an issue at these locations as well.  

 

This is particularly noticeable at the '01' and '11' positions, with an odd little curved piece that does not align properly with the turnouts at each end of it.

 

Track laying is fundamental to the successful running of the layout, and it is best if possible to use a single standard geometry, especially in continuous circuit tail chasing layouts; flexible and set track do not mix in this respect even when the profiles match.  Check that the baseboard is level and rigid, then relay the track ensuring that all the pieces are flat to the board (or the risers on the high level sections) and that there are smooth vertical transition curves at the top and bottom of the gradients; this can be tricky on curves as it easy for them to adopt a slight twist.  You also need to ensure that the pieces are laid as smoothly linear to each other as possible, and that the rail ends are close or joining in the joiner/fishplates.  A gap that a wheel can drop slightly into can cause problems at the other end of a rigid long wheelbased loco or vehicle, and on the loco pickup is compromised if a pickup wheel lifts off the rail.  

 

You might be having problems with your couplings as well.  Tension locks are in theory a standard and compatible form of coupler, but in practice there are differences in hook and in bar profile, materials (and hence flexibility), distance protruding beyond the buffer beams, and height above rail level, sometimes even within one manufacturer's range and even in one case on my layout in height between the NEM mountings on each end of one loco!  The bars are supposed to act as buffing plates and hold the buffers of adjoining coupled vehicles apart to prevent buffer locking, but if they override, especially at the tops and bottoms of gradients, the vehicles will be prone to derailment both from buffer locking and from incorrect weight distribution.  

 

My specification is that all locos must be able haul and propel all stock in any formation anywhere on the layout without stalling on dead frogs, which they can and do, but my layout has easier curvature than yours, and is a fiddle yard to terminus affair which does not have the same geometry issues as a closed circle having to line up perfectly.  It is also dead flat.

 

Smooth operation and gentle driving technique in itself helps to prevent derailments by not jerking the stock about needlessly, so as well as well laid smooth track it is important to ensure good pickup to avoid stalls.  Regular cleaning of rail heads and pickup surfaces, and the interface between the turnouts' switch and closure rails that act as electrical connections, is strongly advised.  You may wish to consider wiring across these connections to avoid problems; I haven't found it to be an issue if things are kept clean and carbon deposit buildup cleared with a file, but your layout has more turnouts than mine.  

 

Make sure that debris does not accumulate in the flangeways of the turnouts, between the running rail and the plastic check rails (especially after you've ballasted the track!), as this can lift flanges, causing pickup problems or derailments as well.  I have a set of pound shop kiddies paint brushes which are u/s for painting anything because they are too stiff and coarse, but are excellent for this job!

 

Can't help much with the wiring mess, sorry; mine's probably just as bad, and it's a rat's nest under the boards.  As the layout is permanently erected it sort of doesn't matter much until things go wrong, when it's easier to replace the wire than attempt to dig it out for a repair; this is not recommended practice and very lazy!  But there is less of it as I don't use point motors and hand change my turnouts, all insulfrogs.  I do have Dapol operating signals, though!