Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DLT last won the day on May 14 2011

DLT had the most liked content!


Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

DLT's Achievements



  1. Thanks very much for the recomendations Guys, I am investigating. Meanwhile I'm working on a platform canopy for the GW station, based on that on the down platform at the real Bridport (and I hope Mr.Bulwell Hall will approve!) The excellent new book is very useful in this respect, but these two photos are actually from the Disused Stations website: I'm not sure of the exact dimensions, so I've scaled them to fit the site and they will be slightly underscale. Also I haven't found an exact match for that canopy valance comercially, but I can modify the Slater's version to be pretty close. Cheers, Dave.
  2. Fabulous Tim, not sure what else to say! Best wishes, Dave.T
  3. Looking in the other direction, another intention is to "work up" the standard gauge station area. making the NG headshunt longer has allowed the addition of a barrow-crossing from the SG platform ramp to the NG station, and the inclusion of a PW hut for the SG. Heres some views with and without the buildings: The PW hut is a 422 Modelmaking resin kit and not strictly GWR. Please can anyone point me in the direction of a genuine GWR PW hut kit? Many thanks, Dave.
  4. Very nice indeed Mr.Goose. How have you found the 422 kit? You may find you have an issue with the long thin resin parts bowing. I have a 422 kit, and I've had to add internal bracing. I guess if you add internal walls to the station building, that should do the trick. All the best, Dave.
  5. Hi Guys, Just been catching up on the doings at Ramchester, and have probably worn out the "like" button. I'm really impressed by the developments in the goods facilities and the fiddle yard. I've also been quizzing Howard about the materials used for the greenery around the extended stream, so very effective scenic work there. All the best, Dave.T
  6. Very interesting! Seeing as there was much debate/competition about which route to the west to choose; if Dorchester to Exeter had been chosen, then the Yeovil and Exeter would most likely not have been built; or at least, not in that form. Had London to Exeter traffic have come via Southampton and Dorchester, the "Old Road" via Ringwood and Wimborne would not have become the backwater that it did, as It would have been an important route for through trains avoiding Bournemouth.
  7. At last a bit of progress to show: Its taken a bit of trial and error to get the levels matching and reduce the thickness of the Sundeala trackbase so that the first bit of the siding slopes down but the rest is level. I plan to retain the coal-bunkers; they are somewhat unlikely in this location, but they make a nice scenic feature and help to interrupt the large expanse of flatness. The narrow gauge track will be at three different levels here, which should help as well. The joint between the different rail sections is soldered with brass rod stiffeners on the non-viewing side, but I haven't done the special fishplates yes. Apparently a fishplate joining two different rail sections is called a Compromise Fishplate.
  8. Very nice indeed Jack. And I like the arrangement of Backscratchers mounted from underneath. Cheers, Dave.
  9. Hi Amanda, I generally agree with what Simon has said, Although if you've already got many bits, use them if you can. I would certainly stay with rigid chassis, at least to start with. As the chassis is a Highlevel kit, the included gearbox will be excellent, and if your motor fits then use it. Although given the choice, I would go with one of the new Highlevel motors. What motor is recommended for the kit? Its perfectly feasible to fit Gibson wheels without one, but a press will make it a LOT quicker and easier. You say you have got a NWSL Press, I'm not familiar with that, will it quarter wheels? Otherwise Markits wheels are excellent. When it comes to pickups, there is a discussion about wipers verses plungers here: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/168267-plunger-or-wiper-pickups/ Its wipers every time for me, as long as is practical. You may find plungers easier on a small-wheeled tank engine with full spring detail, as there may not be room for wipers. There are many examples on my Workbench topic here: DLT's SR Loco Workbench and the photo shows how I cut away some of the spring detail to fit wipers: Hope this helps, Best of luck! Dave.
  10. Wow, that's a highly ingenious solution Ian! And I like the toilet roll holder analogy. Please could you explain the principle to the rest of my family??? Your loco looks to be 7mm scale where the issues are less of a problem. Some of my 0-Gauge friends use plungers intended for 4mm scale on their locos. My experience has been with the commercial plungers which have to be fitted from the outside of the frames before the wheels are installed, and are foreverafter inaccessible. All the best, Dave. PS Do you have a topic running on your modelling?
  11. Its wipers every time wherever possible for me. They are pretty simple to produce and install, and there's many examples on my SR Loco Workbench topic (link below). I like to build the pickup system as a separate assembly that is then screwed in place. Plungers have to be fitted before you install the wheels, and then can't be accessed without removing them again. Several times I've had a non-working loco brought to me, and the problem is seized plungers. Often the only solution has been to break them out, and I've then replaced them with wipers. If your pickups are acting as brakes, then its possible that the tension on them is too tight. With a wiper you can lengthen it or use a finer wire. I find 15thou Nickel-Silver wire to be the optimum; springy enough to achieve sufficient pressure for reliable pickup, but without any of the dreaded braking force. Hope this helps, Cheers, Dave.
  12. Hi Paul, There is a topic discussing it quite recently here: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/123786-slaters-mek-pak-changed/ What is currently MekPak (which is a Slater's name) does not dissolve C&L components, whereas the stuff I am using does. I don't know how old this bottle is, I think it came from a deceased friend, but it's called Plastic Magic, and has a £2.75 label on it. The stuff that C&L sell for their track is just called Butanone, see here: https://www.clfinescale.co.uk/online-store/Materials-%26-Tools-c32279095 Thanks, Dave.
  13. I did think about extending the SG and having some mixed-gauge pointwork, but there isn't really room. Besides, I didn't want to overdo it; mixed gauge was pretty rare on public lines in the UK.
  14. Another aspect of the redesign was to incorporate a mixed-gauge siding, where a standard and narrow gauge siding met end on. More years ago than i care to remember I picked up some C&L Finescale track parts secondhand, and filed them away in a drawer to "mature"... These were some code 124 bullhead rail, plus moulded sleepers and rail-chairs. It was simplicity itself to add a third rail to an existing siding (C&L flexible) by threading the chairs on to the rail, positioning with a rudimentary plasticard gauge, and sticking them down with Butanone. C&L sell Butanone, I used a bottle labelled Plastic Magic. I think Plastic Weld is the same thing. Being moulded in ABS, Mek Pak won't touch the C&L parts, but means its useful for stripping the enamel paint off the existing track.
  15. Bridport was always supposed to represent a restricted site, but I have to admit that some aspects were designed to stitch-up visiting operators..... There will now be two long sidings, holding eight wagons minimum, instead of three sidings that you could just squeeze five in. Mind you, there are some Southwold style Cleminson six-wheel wagons on the to do list, which will be twenty feet long, whereas my standard 4-wheels opens are 10 feet. The headshunt will just take a Baldwin and five wagons, four will be more comfortable.
  • Create New...