Search the Community
Showing results for 'Templot' in blog entries.
-
I have just started on the turnout complex in front of the shed. This George Heiron photo shows the three 'zig zag' turnouts which are the subject of this update. The next two photos show the relevant part of the Templot track plan of the shed, followed by the ply and rivit sleepers positioned on the template. This shows the reduced Templot plan of the relevant trackwork. More to follow in the next few days.
-
In which Ravenser finally locates the "Create Blogs" page
Ravenser posted a blog entry in Blacklade Artamon Square
Longer-standing members will remember the 2006/7 Layout Challenge which started on RMWeb2 before we broke it. This produced a number of rather fine layouts including Keyhaven. It also - mostly - produced Blacklade. The basic remit of the Challenge was to produce a small layout providing a showcase for some of the high standard RTR we have enjoyed in recent years . LisaP4 defined the rules to require layout to have a maximum footprint of 6 square feet . That killed off an idea of mine to base a small layout on a version of the Timesaver shunting puzzle and mocked up to represent a version of Tyne Commission Quay transplanted to the foreshore of the Thames in the 1950s and electrified at 1500V dc. It would have required 8 square feet . In retrospect Tynesaver Wharf ("For Your Economical Fuel!") was a merciful escape - the work involved would have been far too much and I'd have been stuck with a half built layout stalled and abandoned. As opposed to a 4/5th built layout stalled, like wot I 'ave..... The scheme would have required amongst other things a DC Kits EM1 and a Judith Edge EB1 (and possibly an EF1 to boot) and a heck of a lot of inlaid track - always bad news on the work front . The EM1 kit I acquired cheap when the local model shop closed down is still sat behind me with no obvious prospect of being built. It's not merely well down the list - it's not on the list at all. As well as this still born scheme , the Challenge produced a large range of schemes which never quite made it - I think at one point there were just under 80 layout proposal threads in the subforum on RMWeb 2 and to my mind the unbuilt proposals were the saddest loss when that version of RMWeb congealed and froze. I recall Buckjumper had a proposal for a gaslit subterranean S7 affair in 1890s E.London ("Always carry a revolver east of Aldgate, Watson") illustrated by some atmospheric sketches (Sepulchre St wasn't it?). A particular mention is due to two very innovative and radical schemes to use the footprint - Kenton's "Long Thinney" and a bold circular doughnut multilevel scheme in N , whose name and builder I have forgotten (Sorry!) . Both proceeded a long way into construction before abandonment for differing reasons and both used the idea of a very narrow board to maximise length . But to return to what actually got built on my part I attach the link to the thread on RMWeb3 (itself starting as a repost of the RMWeb 2 thread - I'm sure some of this material must have been through either the Library of Alexandria or the Saxon monastery of Jarrow at some point): Blacklade - RMWeb 3 Challenge thread It is perhaps reposting the initial ideas: Quote Plan B revolves around on of the plans from Carl Arendt's micro site , which has attracted me for a while: http://www.carendt.c...lans/index.html The plan in question is under Shelf Switchers / Passenger Lines , and is called "Amalgamated Terminal 2" . It's a slight tweak of "Amalgamated Terminal" Carl has designed this around shunting passenger coaches, thinking in US terms of loco hauled passenger trains being shunted and reformed. I looked at it and thought "small terminus for DMUs" Some people may remember the long threads on RMWeb 1.5 about modern small termini and MUs: [Links deleted because dead] and there was a discussion on RMWeb 1.0 sparked by some photos of Manchester Mayfield. Cloggydog [Alan Monk] declared an unfulfilled urge to build a small Manchester terminus in the late 60s. Anyway, my concept here is to take Amalgamated Terminus 2 and lengthen it to 8' 4" : ie 2 boards each 4'2" long, 5" wide at the board joint , and 12" wide at the end. Someone who can remember things like triganometry may be able to confirm, but according to my maths (done using strips, trriangles , and fractions on the back of an envelope)that's just under 6 square feet. There are a few tweaks to the trackplan. There'll be an extra crossover between the centre platform and the front platform, giving access to what Carl Arendt marks as "Engine Ready road" and for me will be a small fueling point. And there'll be an extra fiddle yard road at the back What's marked as "Covered Concourse" becomes the back platform. The middle platform moves to between the front and middle roads We are in a largish Midlands county town , somewhere between 1989/90 and 2000/1. [in the event, I've slipped into an "early" period 1985-90 and a "late" period 2000-6: The end of the Central Trains franchise closes the latter] It isn't Derby, or Nottingham, or Leicester or Lincoln. Maybe it replaces one of them, and it resembles bits from all. It had an ex GC through station and an ex MR terminus, and now the rather battered MR station remains, served by DMUs In the early period we get 114s, 105s, 150/2 , 153, 155 and Pacers. (In other words I build the kits in the cupboard and finish the conversions) Maybe a 108 and 101 in blue/grey (I grab some new RTR). Parcels are possible (CCTs + 31). A 20 brings the fuel tank for the fueling point. Maybe a 31 and 2 coaches subs for a DMU [i bought the RTR; Hornby forstalled the 153 conversion , and I bought 2; the other conversions still await - a tentative start has been made on one Pacer: see my blog] In the later period the Modernisation Plan units disappear , and I get to run my Central Trains Turbostar and the 156 I'm promising myself. [and got] Maybe a 158 (See Steve Jones picture) [W Yorks 158 in service, and I'm finally going to order a CT 2 car set from Hattons. The photo in question was of a classic CT pairing on the Joint line - 153+158] Maybe I'll sort out the 37 conversion and use it for the fuel [ Maybe by the end of the next decade. A cheap 57 off the Bachmann stand and a discount 66 will serve in the meantime] It will be DCC ; some of the interest will be joining and splitting trains. I can just manage 150/2 + 153, and 142 + 142, or 142 + 153 , or 153 + 153 are possible It will be OO. I want to have pukka OO track, and as beginners don't start with double slips, I'm thinking of investigating Marcway. This may affect the geometry slightly: as drawn it seems to use Peco medium radius. [ I went Marcway] It will use stock I'm going to build for the club project , which will be DCC anyway, plus units intended for the home layout I haven't built. The only things I would need to buy is two Pacers. Virtually all the structures /bits can be sourced out of my cupboard. In any case there's only a few low relief flats involved. I don't need to build stock specially. So it should be a relatively quick project. 8'4" comfortably fits in the "study" where the home layout was going to go [ Ended up as 8'6" long] I've roughed it out with stock and Peco templates on some lining paper full size. I've never tried XtraCAD, and this seemed quicker. Also I'd endorse Neil and Shortliner's comments about needing to check every quarter inch And it fits. I need to get a friend to turn it out in Templot to check the geometry 100% for handbuilt, but it drops in place and all the stock fits... The "bow-tie" shape has caused a few interesting issues with the pointwork and motorisation of same in the throat area, but works, more or less, scenically After October 2007, construction gradually slowed down, and by the beginning of 2009 it more or less ground to a halt as I became occupied on other fronts. I repeat the last posting in the old thread , dated Sat Aug 29th 2009: Quote Its been a long while since anything was posted - most of my efforts in the last few months have gone into stock.However this does mean that there are a few new items to play with and the other evening I had a running session. I went for an early period session and managed to get 8 trains on the layout, being W Yorks 158, 2 x 153s, W Yorks 155, 108 , 3 car 101, parcels (31 + 2 bogievans) , 20 + TTA .Operation was on the same principle as those puzzles they used to sell , where there were 9 positions and 8 tiles, so you had to shuffle things round using the one available space. I managed to run trains for over an hour and a quarter before getting myself boxed in to the point where I needed to take something off in the fiddle yard to make another move possible . Given the small size of the layout and the lack of frieght , the operational potential is good, even if permissive working was stretched a bit now and again. The 3 car 101 is probably a bit much. The original idea was to make up a 2 car set , but as Hornby's unit was actually allocated to TS at the right period, it seems a pity to rework it as power car+ trailer and dump the centre car. Whether such a 3 car unit would ever have run as a temporary power twin at this period is unclear, but there seems to be some evidence formations were starting to get a bit improvised and mix'n match by the mid to late 80s. It would certainly make operations simpler if I just removed the centre car on an ad hoc basis. Both of the DC Kits in the cupboard are for 2 car units (105 and 114) so once one of those is built there is an alternative anyway The running session has clarified things in terms of fleet strategy and what projects I start next. I was a little surprised to find that I already have almost everything for the early period (1985-90) and potentially plenty to spare, whereas I'm short of stock for the "late" period 2000-7. I'd assumed it was the other way round. To get a complete blue period fleet, I need to swap over the W Yorks 158 and the Central 153 (which was pressed into service to test consisting - dead easy with the PowerCab). I've already got a Provincial 150/1 on order from Trains4U - far from being an unnecessary indulgence, it can replace the 158 with something appropriate in short order. Longer term , I'm intending to buy a second RR 153 to go with my existing one, once Hornby release a RR livery in late condition with ploughs. In the medium term , however, it looks like I need to get on with reworking one of my Pacers with the Branchlines chassis pack. Neither Pacer is operable at present (no decoders/coarse wheels jam in the points) so this would get some "dead" stock into traffic. I was considering one of 3 possiblities as "next cab off the rank" - the Pacer project, detailing up a body for the Airfix 31 and building the Ratio Southern bogie brake van . However it looks like the choice is made - I already have a perfectly serviceable Hornby 31 and 2 parcels vans... Another way of freeing up space in the fiddle yard would be to fit a decoder to the old Bachmann 03 lurking in a cupboard , and sort out the pickups, couplings and a few other bits of upgrading . Again it was on the list as a "quick win" project to get some stored stock back into use and may well be prioritised Looking at the fleet list from the other evening, if I was running late period, i'd need to swap out 2 Modernisation Plan DMUs, the parcels trains, and the 20+TTA. I've a couple of Type 5s and a late green TTA recently finished,so the fuel oil is covered, but the only other DMUs currently available are a Turbostar and a 156. I had been hesitating whether to get a Central 158 from Hattons, on the grounds I didn't really need it - perhaps I do. And it does suggest I should get my finger out and finish the Bratchill 150/2 which has been stalled for an indecent length of time. Even with both I'll only have one DMU spare for the later period. If I just build everything I've already got for the earlier period, I could have 4 spare units, 5 spare locos and at least 3 spare parcels vans.... It's one thing trying to calculate what stock you can and can't run and do and don't need, but once you actually try a session everything becomes a lot easier to see Nothing has been done on the layout since. However it has seen occasional use as a programming track . You'll have spotted that a couple more items of stock have been finished (PMV , TTA) or begun (Pacer) Having recently managed to shed a couple of commitments within the club I should now have more time to sort out the long list of jobs to be done in other areas - finishing Blacklade being one. The items still outstanding are the old ones - the remaining point motors and the station walling. But with luck we may see some progress in the coming months As I've now found the Create Blogs page again, and managed to transfer this to a blog, I can update this entry to say I've given the thing another running session, and what sticks out like a sore thumb is that the points do not throw completely . If you don't check each one is fully over and snug , and push it into place where necessary derailments result . The problem is clearly the one discussed here: Strengthening Wire on Tortoises I can watch the wire bending instead of the point moving if I view it from below. So this will need sorting out when I find out where I can source piano wire - and what I use to cut it with . I'm not going to wreck the edge on Xurons- they're expensive tools. This time round the 101 was reduced to 2 car, we acquired a "swinger" in the form of the newly built PMV and I found I didn't need the second diesel loco , as the 31 could be used for the TTA and minor pilot duties . That's 7 and a half trains, but proves comfortable to operate: I managed over an hour and a half of train shuffling without getting boxed in. Part of the concept is that each unit needs to go onto the fuelling point as some stage - this gives some point or or purpose to the train shuffling moves On account as it were are two quick snaps: And yes I really do need to add the station buildings, or at least the surrounding walls which would once have supported the overall roof -
Skinner's Dock by Shadow original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ Imported from original thread on RMWeb. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:17 pm This started off as a design that I made up on Hugh Flynn's "Layout Plans" topic (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=24472&start=733) Basically, Shortliner made a comment about why not use two 2x3 boards to make a 4x3 board instead of the usual 6x2. This got me thinking, and since I couldn't come up with a reason why you can't have a short and fat board as opposed to a long thin one, I played with Xtrkcad and came up with the following :- The idea was for a rail served canal basin/wharf surrounded by warehouses/factories. A couple of quick images knocked up with Google Sketch showed promise. The two tracks exiting on the right were to a traverser, that then feed the stock into the three tracks hidden behind the back scene. Angling the tracks allowed the on view track and the hidden track to keep the same orientation. It also improves the viewing perspective from the front of the layout. The next question that came up was what happens to the tracks on the right? The initial concept of a big cushion on floor was dropped (sorry, no pun intended) to the one shown below :- The next problem was the hardest off all, what to call the new layout? Well as always, a simple solution,"Skinner's Dock". With a surname of Tanner what else could it be!! (Thanks to Stubby47 and Shortliner for that ) This also gives a reason for it being there, an industry that requires lots of goods in & out. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:03 pm Came across this photo which depicts exactly what I'm trying to achieve. (Hopefully ) (A few rows down, the view of Bishops Wharf) http://www.1museumstreet.co.uk/wdia/work/01a.htm __________________________________________ Comment posted by steamraiser on Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:18 pm Looks very interesting. Lots of wagons with tank engines to shuffle them around. How did you import Templot into Google sketch? Gordon Bristol __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:42 pm Used Xtkcad, (not Templot), under "Files" on the menu bar you can "Export to Bitmap". Did this and then imported it into Sketch the same way, "Files", "Import", "Open". Then just place on the plane that you require. Shadow __________________________________________ Comment posted by shortliner on Sat Aug 01, 2009 3:51 pm To export things from XTrkCad ( their bitmap export can be 'orrible)it is well worth looking at http://www.faststone.org/FSCaptureDetail.htm which will let you grab areas of the screen and is usefull for all sorts of purposes - the current version costs US$19.95 for lifetime use. It was freeware and it is still possibe to download the earlier version from http://www.oldapps.com/fast_stone_capture.php __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:27 pm Just back from a couple weeks away on holiday, lounging by the pool. Cold beer in one jand, sketch pad in other designing baseboards:wink: These drawings below show current idea. Sides will be from 10mm Ply All the rest from 6mm Ply The two halves will be joint to make a 4ft x 4ft scenic section, and a 1ft extension either side for the fiddle yard access. (Not shown) Flat base added just to get idea of view. Some quick buildings added, not the design to be used, but again, just to get an idea of space. __________________________________________
-
Mawgan Porth - O gauge BR(S) North Cornwall by paulr1949 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:31 pm Well for what it's worth, here is some information on my current layout. Comments welcome (nice ones preferably!!) Up until recently, my interest had always been in 4mm scale 00. Like many people, I had a layout which never seemed to get very far - all the track was done, the wiring was done, but not much else happened for ages. One day I saw advertised for sale a layout which was once "railway of the month" in the Modeller, set in my own favourite area (north Cornwall) and period (BR SR late 50s/early 60s), went to see it and bought it. It came home shoehorned into a Nissan Primera and went into the loft, which I had already insulated and floored. Apart from rewiring it with something a bit thicker than what looked like multicore telephone cable and fitting it up so it would connect electrically with my own layout, not much more happened for a bit. After a while, the boss and I decided that it wasn't best placed in the loft, so we moved the greenhouse and had a shed 15 x 10 put up in the garden. This was completely insulated with loft insulation, although it still gets pretty hot in summer due to the orientation of the garden. The "bought" 00 layout was moved in, with new legs being built where necessary, and my original layout went on the other side, making a U shape. Still not a lot happened with it and I soon began hankering after something else. It all started by building a Parkside van kit for the then club O gauge layout. That was followed by another O gauge wagon kit and quite a lot of involvement in the club's 7mm narrow gauge layout, suddenly finding myself taking over responsibility for the wiring. I simplified it a little but it still looks like one of the old telephone exchanges. If DCC had been around 10 years ago things might have been different! To cut a long story short, my original layout went into store, leaving a space 10'6 x 2'6. Could I get a layout in this? I have a small workbench at one end of the shed, a bit of this could be "covered" by the layout. I played around with track plans and decided I could just do it as long as I had a kick-back fiddle yard from a sector track. The sector track meant just 5 points were needed - ideal as I was building them all! Three boards actually 42"x 30" were built - I was rather annoyed during baseboard construction, as, having gone to a well-renowned local timber yard for the plywood and having it cut, I discovered that some of it had got damp, and it didn't take long for it to warp when it dried out a bit. This was a while, so I ended up having to ditch some - I replaced it with some from my local Homebase which was much better! One board's side vertical strip is still warped slightly but it is not on the visible side! It is all 9mm ply, including cross-bracing, and has stood up quite well to the variations of temperature experienced. The boards are laid on a framework of 3 x 1 timber rather than legs, although this may well be changed in the future. When laying out the track to check positions, it became clear that I could only have a 40" long train on the sector track which was not enough. I therefore added a small extension board 9" x 30" which meant there was enough room for a tank engine and 2 coaches or about 5 wagons and a brake van.. The original plan is shown below. Once the boards were in position, tracklaying started. I have used C&L RTR track throughout on the front of the layout. Points are built using their templates, rail, sleepers and chairs, together with pre-formed common crossings (frogs to you and me!) and blades. Having built points in 00 and as I had 5 to do, I decided that things would get along a lot quicker if I didn't have to file and shape these parts! Point control is by tortoise motors. The original plan was kept to almost exactly, but I had to replace an A4 point with an A5 one as one of my two engines wouldn't go through it! All track is laid on 1/8" cork. Wiring followed, two droppers to each section of rail. I considered very carefully whether to go DCC, but decided that as I only had a small layout, 5 points and probably a maximum of 4 engines the additional expense could not at the time be justified. In fact, the only thing which would have tipped the balance was sound, and there isn't a huge selection of Southern steam loco sounds around. A control panel was built and tested - everything worked (eventually) - there only being two short circuits which were quickly traced. Ballasting was next on the agenda. I find it quite satisfying as long as I don't do too much at a time. A large bag, PVA, water and washing up liquid. Following this, I decided on some civil engineering work, and built the platform. This is made from 3mm ply (of which a friend has a large supply in 4" x 5'?? lengths. The surface is spray painted and covered in ground white pepper, as suggested in Gordon Gravett's 7mm book. This gives it the texture of tarmac/ashphalt. Another coat of spray paint followed. Individual cut plastic card paving stones are glued all the way along the edges. I had bought a station building ex-display from Kirtley model buildings at the GoG show at Telford in 2005. As with most layouts, things change. I felt that the two original fiddle-yard sidings were too close to the backscene and the rear of the board. I also thought it would be nice to add an extra board, which would include pointwork to access platforms and yard, with just the fiddleyard and the main line accessed by the sector track. I wanted to be able to revert if necessary so had to ensure that connections at each end were in the same place - not as easy as I thought. I can't really leave all 4 boards up in the shed all the time. This is the new plan. A three-way point was bought from Marcway - I really didn't fancy building one. This brought its own problems, as the sleepers are copperclad and not as thick as the C&L ones. I decided to lay plastic card under the point to get the levels correct, but on reflection I think gluing a second copperclad directly under each sleeper may have been better (or even a complete sheet). Having soldered the dropper wires and got the levels to my satisfaction, I laid the connecting tracks and ballasted. Inspection showed that the alignment had slipped a little at one baseboard join between tracks, my pins had not held it enough. The only course of action was to lift that length and relay (and reballast) it, which was duly done after much gnashing of teeth. There are other issues with the Marcway point in that it is proving very difficult to attach cosmetic chairs as I had planned to do, due to the "lump" where it has been soldered. There's no actual problem with the point itself. I'm still thinking about this one - some grinding down with a burr in a minidrill has taken place and I need to see what this looks like with a few chairs which have been painted before I go any further. And yes, the track at the baseboard joint leading into the bay platform *has* been relaid to get rid of that kink The fiddleyard issue was solved by deciding that the layout will have 1 fiddleyard siding when set up in its original 3-board format, but the new board has a Peco point inserted which will lead to an extra siding which will be on a 4"-wide plank which can be bolted to the front of the layout after it is set up. I will concoct something to enable stock to be exchanged, but it will probably have to be crane shunted for now: not ideal. As can be seen on plan B, the layout has also gained a short locomotive siding, which will just have a water column and hand coaling facility Another problem with inserting a new board is that it all has to be wired up - which has been done - and a new control panel built - which is being done at the moment. I have discovered that all 4 of the female 25-way D connectors which I have "in stock" have leads which are too short to reach from control panel to similar male connector on board - so I've taken all 25 off and soldered new longer ones! Oh the joy of everything not quite working for you! And that's where I am at the moment. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Stuart in OZ on Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:10 am HI.. Nice looking start, hope to see more as it get closer to being finshed. I have just been given 12x2 in side the house, so I'm re-planning a new layout, O gauge is so tempting.... Stuart in OZ __________________________________________ Comment posted by marsa69 on Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:02 am Something similiar to what I'm trying to achieve. Keep up the good work __________________________________________ Comment posted by onslaught832 on Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:14 am Hi Paul, that looks like a very promising layout , is that a Bullied coach in the platform , it looks rather nice, what make is it Phill __________________________________________ Comment posted by class37418stag on Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:38 am Hiya Look good of your plans so same me too I think about small layout of small terminus by large scale of 0 gauge I will plan british railways of small terminus in 1960s I will look forward your layout by when finished Thank you Andrew __________________________________________ Comment posted by BlackRat on Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:55 am Very nice so far! What happend to the original layout? recognise it but cant remember when it was in the RN. __________________________________________ Comment posted by greengiant on Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:29 pm Looks familiar Have you had a tidy up? __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:57 pm A few more random facts Couplings will be Dinghams - 6 of 7 electromagnets have been installed, with one more to put in on the new board. Wiring is common return, 2 wires soldered to every section of rail, including the frog rails and switch blades. Signalling will be installed and eventually working (possibly not the two shunt signals, although I've made provision for them on the control panel (currently under construction). I would like to electrically interlock them with the points and opposing signals so it is not possible to clear signals for moves in opposite directions. I may give interlocking the power feed to the track a miss though! I have one readybuilt signal from Scale Signal supply (which will be the main platform starter) and one kit to build (a bracket signal for the bay platform starter which will be affixed to a tall retaining wall which will run between bay platform and fiddle yard). Others will follow in the future. Baseboards are joined with EMGS/C&L dowels and M8 bolts, although on reflection I would use the smaller type of joiners available from various suppliers in the future, as it is very easy not to get a flat base to the hole drilled out for the dowels to sit in. onslaught832 wrote: is that a Bullied coach in the platform , it looks rather nice, what make is it Phil - yes it is a Bulleid coach, a semi-open brake third/second built RTR for me by CRT kits BlackRat wrote: What happend to the original layout? recognise it but cant remember when it was in the RN Blackrat - the layout is Trezeath and featured in July 2000. It's still in my shed on the other side, it's the one I was trying to build myself which has been retired. greengiant wrote: Have you had a tidy up? No I still have things lying everywhere except where I expect to find them! And thanks to others for the encouraging comments. Here's the control panel under construction And a bit of point construction Nothing done today - I had a trip down to ride on the Swanage railway, lots of inspiration from station clutter and signalboxes __________________________________________ Comment posted by BlackRat on Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:26 pm Yes I remember it now! A super layout, you are very lucky to have it! Good luck with the O. Got a few bits and pieces here so can see a Cornish Clay Branch in the offing! __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:39 pm Progress with the control panel today, with the arrival yesterday of the pushbutton switches I ordered for the uncouplers. They were duly fitted and wired in, along with wires for the signals. One slight snag when I realised I need more wires for the polarity switching of the three way point - luckily I have plenty of spare capacity as I wired up a 25-way D plug/socket but only needed about 17 Tomorrow hopefully will get the point switches all done as well, that should be the control panel finished(?!?!) Why Mawgan Porth? It's a hamlet on the coast north of Newquay and South of Padstow. My modeller's license says that the LSWR was pushing to get farther south so promoted a line to Newquay. Branching off from the Wadebridge-Padstow line, it got as far as Mawgan Porth, by which time the GWR had taken the unusual step of collaborating and built it's own line north from Newquay, meeting about a mile inland from Mawgan Porth. Both companies hoped that the sandy beaches would lead to big development and loads of passengers to the forthcoming railway hotel(s), but it didn't happen, and remained a sleepy little village. Well it fulfils my aim of a North Cornwall branch of BR(S) and allows the occasional incursion of a 14xx, perhaps an autocoach or a flying banana one day. Oh I bought a secondhand 14xx to go with my M7 and O2, it needs a bit of work doing to it, including repainting into BR(W) livery, but the price was right! I'm hoping I might find another coach at Telford. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dan Randall on Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:36 am Hi Paul Have you made any progress on the layout recently? Regards Dan __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Sep 20, 2009 4:32 pm Dan Randall wrote: Hi Paul Have you made any progress on the layout recently? Regards Dan Hmm - not very much! I had planned to update yesterday but.... I've had a very busy month including 10 days away and acting as emergency shopper in chief for my wife who was in charge of refreshments at the church flower festival! I'm also trying to organise accommodation for a holiday in New Zealand we have planned for next year. I have made progress on the control panel and started on a parkside Dundas SR cattle wagon which I bought at Telford. I took loads of bits with me on holiday to try and do but there really wasn't time, and I only managed one evening. As you can see (below), I am sticking with plain old DC for now! It's virtually done, witness the umbilical cords to the layout. The wires at bottom right go to DIN sockets for controllers. Section switches and push buttons for magnets are on the track diagram, which I sort of replicated in reverse on the back of the panel (which is 3mm MDF). Point indicator lights are grain of wheat bulbs in 3mm LED holders (they are on the diagram) whilst the point and signal switches are in the line below across the bottom. My next task is to try and make the 3-way point look better with C&L chairs cut in two. I have tried grinding down the solder on the Marcway point and fitting some, which doesn't look too bad, but is a long job even with a new grinding wheel in a mains-powered drill with extension. I'm going to try flattening out the solder by melting it with a heavy weight/pressure on the rail and see if that's any easier. I am not sure how easy it will be to get cosmetic chairs on the inside of the rails too. If I can't get it looking right, it's going to have to come up and I will have to build a 3-way point with C&L parts after all. I don't think I can use their template, because I do not have enough space (it's 1 in 8/1 in 6 tandem, and the marcway point is 8'/6' radius). I have the Trax software (I really can't justify buying Templot just for one three-way point - sorry Martin!) and I can draw out a template of approximately the same radius - I might even get it to fit better. Anyway, I do hope to get some more done this week, especially as my wife is away on a course for a couple of days __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dan Randall on Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:26 pm Thanks for the update Paul - I hope you manage to get some work done this week. Regards Dan __________________________________________
-
My Layout by Weskie original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:11 pm Hi All Well after years of not finishing a layout, or even getting anywhere near to finishing. I thought i'd give it another go!! So i resurected a couple of baseboards from a previous project. In true 'Blue Peter fashion' here's one i made earlier! (6mm ply, double thickness at ends, and cross braced.) Then after a couple of hours playing on Templot i came up with this. Apologies for being another branch line but.... Not sure if you can transfer a plan from Templot to here so i took a picture instead. Then being fairly satisfied i printed the whole plan out. (Isn't Templot wonderful) (From just another satisfied customer.) So it now looks like this! Being fairly small there could be half a chance i might finish this one, or at least get close. That will do for now. I'll try to keep it updated. Cheers Weskie ______________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:27 pm Well here's the first piece of trackwork for the layout Cheating a bit as i managed to recover it from a previous attempt. Fairly bog standard construction, steel bullhead rail, ply and rivet sleepers. Hopfully i'll be able to recover the crossover as well, but still working on that. More pictures later. Cheers Weskie __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:46 pm I thought it about time for an update. I have managed to buld some more track and made a start on the bridge across the canal. Slow progress but never mind. More updates to follow __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:11 pm Hi all Here's an update of the slow progress on the layout, some more track work completed including the B7 turnout I built for the modeller of the day award (Thanks again to all who competed and voted) It??????????¬???????s only roughly positioned as there is more ground work to be completed first, same goes for the one behind as well. I wanted to get the mainline to fiddle yard, off to the right, completed first so that maybe I could wire up and do some test running, but that required a bridge to be built. Hey Presto here??????????¬???????s the first attempt to glue some plasticard together! Fairly straight forward, just plasticard glued to a foam board former and painted for blue bricks, just need to pick out some in different colours and fill out the mortar joints. Then fit some capping stones to the parapets??????????¬???????, still working on that. Any advice is always welcome as I??????????¬???????ve never really done much with buildings etc. More updates later Cheers __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:06 pm Thought it was about time I did an update, although not much has altered since the last post. I don??????????¬???????t seem to get much time to model over the summer (What summer I hear). Wet summers make harvesting hard work on machinery so they break down more which makes more work for me. Oh well mustn??????????¬???????t grumble. Mind you what with the credit crunch and the weather (Snow in October!) I fear we are in for a long winter. On the brighter side though, more modelling time. So back to this update, as I said not much to report, a bit more track work and I managed to acquire some trestles, spotted on another thread, but I got mine on offer from Sealey Tools. Hopfully more updates soon Cheers __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Feb 01, 2009 8:24 pm So much for progress! Slowly does it. I??????????¬???????ve been doing some wiring up recently, so here??????????¬???????s a shot of the organised chaos under the baseboards. It will be tidied up after testing (honest). This is top side. I must get round to building a control panel so I can test run, but that means sorting out the signalling as well, which is where some help would be appreciated. Mainly what sort of signal would be used to enter the station? (1960 semaphore). I??????????¬???????ll try to put up a line drawing of the track plan later. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:45 pm 8 months since the last post! Where does the time go? Some progress made over summer. track and fiddle yard connection sorted. Control panel built. exsisting track wired up, not bad really. So it's time to test out the first train Sorry no video so you'll have to trust me that in did run ( sort of) Only managed to wire up the point vee's the wrong way round. Swaped a few wires and it's full steam ahead. __________________________________________
-
John and I have been bouncing some ideas around and I've sketched out a possible layout concept. Effectively two dioramas, one of the station itself and one containing the viaduct. As if this is not enough, John has proposed making the join between them adaptable, FREMO-style, so that additional scenic sections could be added at a later date. Well, let's see how it goes with just this for the moment! Meanwhile I've ordered some 25-inch OS map copies from West Sussex County Council archives, and we will hopefully be off on a field visit in about three weeks to, well, visit the site in the field . The viaduct we have is 14 arches, as against the 37 of the real one, so it will be an impression rather than a full reproduction (it's still nearly 8 ft long as it is). Once I have the maps it will be time to fire up Templot again and we can scare ourselves as to how long the layout is going to end up. And if we want to run a 12-coach PUL/PAN formation (as we do ) the fiddle yards will need to be 12 ft long as well - each end. Either that or the fiddle yard operators will have to be very very quick, Gromit-like, in receiving and sending out trains!
-
Bristol Barrow Road by Barrowroad original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:55 pm About 25 years ago I started collecting information and photographs of my local ex Midland Railway shed, Bristol Barrow Road, and vowed that one day I would create a layout of the site. Well over the past year, with the help of some fellow modellers I now have the baseboards for the layout. The track plan has been produced using templot and has been printed out full size utilising O/S map information to position the shed roundhouse, coaling tower, ash plant and the prominent road viaduct - Barrow Road - which bisects the shed yard. The coaling tower was built for me by Peter aka 'Gravytrain'. Just a taster for now. I shall post some information on the construction of the boards later. Why 25 years - well I have managed to convert and extend to the garage to house the layout and in the intervening period I built a layout based on my other railway interest the Cromford & High Peak Railway. http://www.glevums4.co.uk/Sheep_Pasture_frame.html __________________________________________ Comment posted by 70015APOLLO on Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:35 pm Only the other day I came accross some very good photos of Bristol Barrow Rd shed whilst looking at Mac Hawkins book "Ivo Peter's Classic Steam" (ISBN 0 86288 058 0) - Photo on page 81 is a good shot alongside the main line, MPD to the left, looking along the sweeping curves to the road bridge. A first class location to model -- oozing with atmosphere. Brit15 __________________________________________ Comment posted by Kenton on Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:57 pm I'm intrigued to know why the baseboard is shaped like a coffin Is this to be P4 ? what time period ? __________________________________________ Comment posted by corax67 on Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:46 pm I'm intrigued to know why the baseboard is shaped like a coffin Perhaps one of the "fellow modellers" is an undertaker and recyled a bit of spare timber ? ? ? __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:47 pm 70015APOLLO wrote: Only the other day I came accross some very good photos of Bristol Barrow Rd shed whilst looking at Mac Hawkins book "Ivo Peter's Classic Steam" (ISBN 0 86288 058 0) - Photo on page 81 is a good shot alongside the main line, MPD to the left, looking along the sweeping curves to the road bridge. A first class location to model -- oozing with atmosphere. Brit15 Hi Apollo, I have that photo in front of me. Patriot 45504 Royal Signals was a Bristol loco from 1958 to 1962. I have a framed print of this wonderful Ivo Peters photograph on the wall which I obtained from Ivo Peter's son Julian. One of the Bachmann Patriot's, is waiting conversion to P4. The other two photos in the book aren't bad either!! Kenton wrote: I'm intrigued to know why the baseboard is shaped like a coffin Is this to be P4 ? what time period ? Hi Kenton, The boards look like a coffin because the track through the shed leads to a dead end!! The layout will be P4 and DCC set in the 1955 to 1962 period. corax67 wrote: I'm intrigued to know why the baseboard is shaped like a coffin Perhaps one of the "fellow modellers" is an undertaker and recyled a bit of spare timber ? ? ? Hi Corax, You need to look at it in perspective, nearly coffin shaped but not quite, as it doesn't taper at the 'head end'. Fortunately none of my fellow modellers is an undertaker but one could be classified a 'chip off the block' Cheers, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by BlazeyBridge2 on Tue Feb 10, 2009 1:44 am I imagine this is going to be a pretty good one if Sheep Pasture is anything to go by.... I remember seeing SP exhibited at Cromford Wharf backalong....1995?... an excellent layout IMHO... __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:48 am BlazeyBridge2 wrote: I imagine this is going to be a pretty good one if Sheep Pasture is anything to go by.... I remember seeing SP exhibited at Cromford Wharf backalong....1995?... an excellent layout IMHO... Hi Mike, Thank you for your kind words. Cromford Wharf April 1997, I remember it well, Sheep Pasture was in its embryonic state and was invited to attend an event to celebrate the 3oth anniversary of the closure of the Cromford & High Peak Railway. 'Middlepeak', the another CHPR layout, by my friend Geraint Hughes was also there and we even thought of joining the two together. Here is a photo of Sheep Pasture for you. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Vanders on Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:11 am There's a coincidence: I've been looking at quite a few photos of Barrow Road & the old Midland line after a discussion elsewhere on RMWeb about Kingswood Junction, and I was thinking to myself "I've never seen a model of Barrow Road before"! I'll be sure to watch yours as it develops. Will you have any room on your layout for the Barrow Road arches? __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Tue Feb 10, 2009 1:21 pm barrowroad wrote: and we even thought of joining the two together For some reason, Robin, I thought that you had joined them together at one show, I have a particular memory of seeing them operating as one..... please tell me I'm not hallucinating!! Both are exquisite layouts and very nicely observed. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:51 pm Vanders wrote: There's a coincidence: I've been looking at quite a few photos of Barrow Road & the old Midland line after a discussion elsewhere on RMWeb about Kingswood Junction, and I was thinking to myself "I've never seen a model of Barrow Road before"! I'll be sure to watch yours as it develops. Will you have any room on your layout for the Barrow Road arches? Hi Vanders, How could you have a layout of Barrow Road without the arches? I have room for the main line bridge and 5 arches but not the other eight. You can see the position of Barrow Road between the shed and the coaling tower. Hi Captain, I'm afraid to tell you you have been hallucinating It would have been a nice idea but we never did get round to it. Thank you for your kind comments on behalf of myself and Geraint. Cheers, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by adge-peanuts on Tue Feb 10, 2009 7:15 pm I like the idea of this layout. Used to work as a trainman and remember backing the Bristol Bin liner (Dusty Bin) train back into the siding that was is located there. Keep up the good work __________________________________________ Comment posted by Wheeltapper on Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:10 pm I am looking forward to seeing the completed layout from the Days Road Bridge angle , a look over the parapet was always my first view of the shed with the resultant tingle of expectation . There was usually one or both of the sentinels parked on one of the stub roads beneath the vantage point and closely packed rows of locos on the sidings alongside the shed. Happy Memories ! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Gravy Train on Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:03 am Hi Robin, Its great to see that you are now making progress on the layout, just looking at the Templot track diagram it looks facinating, is it your intention to exhibit it? Looking at the coaling tower, i used to think it was a large structure but it appears somewhat dwarfed by the huge track layout, it is certainly going to be a layout to watch out for on RMweb as it developes. If Sheep Pasture is anything to go by then this layout will look the buisiness. cheers Peter __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:05 am Gravy Train wrote: Hi Robin, Its great to see that you are now making progress on the layout, just looking at the Templot track diagram it looks facinating, is it your intention to exhibit it? Looking at the coaling tower, i used to think it was a large structure but it appears somewhat dwarfed by the huge track layout, it is certainly going to be a layout to watch out for on RMweb as it developes. If Sheep Pasture is anything to go by then this layout will look the buisiness. cheers Peter Hi Peter, The coaling tower will certainly dominate the shed yard north of Barrow Road arches as did the prototype. I have designed the layout on seven boards to enable transportation to exhibitions. I have had some storage trolleys made, based on a design similar to one used by the guys from Liverpool Lime Street... I'll post some pictures in due course. Meanwhile here is a Bachmann Patriot positon under the tower... no track etc but I couldn't resist it. __________________________________________ Comment posted by timlewis on Wed Feb 11, 2009 3:22 pm Well, this looks like it will be very nice indeed: definitely one to watch. Kenton wrote: I'm intrigued to know why the baseboard is shaped like a coffin I'm glad to see that someone else has some weird shaped baseboards (see Coldstream link below), although mine are less obviously coffin shaped! Presumably, because you have the prototype track plan, you arrived, as I did, at an 'optimal' set of baseboard shapes taking into account the layout of the track, turnout positions etc. etc. rather than building a set of full-width rectangular boards and then finding joins in all the wrong places. __________________________________________ Comment posted by WD198 on Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:30 pm Looks like an ambitous project! Looks good so far, will be watching this with interest. About time we had some Steam MPDs, loads of modern TMDs but no so many Steam MPDs. Jack. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:57 pm timlewis wrote: I'm glad to see that someone else has some weird shaped baseboards (see Coldstream link below), although mine are less obviously coffin shaped! Presumably, because you have the prototype track plan, you arrived, as I did, at an 'optimal' set of baseboard shapes taking into account the layout of the track, turnout positions etc. etc. rather than building a set of full-width rectangular boards and then finding joins in all the wrong places. Hi Tim, Just looked at your Coldstream link ....looking good. What adhesive have you used on the Exactoscale Foam? Barrow Road boards The size and shape of the Barrow Road boards were dictated by the templot track plan and the position of the turnouts. At the shed end I wanted the shed on one board and as the roundhouse is approx 182ft square this fixed the board size at 2ft 2in for the front elevation. The optimum board length worked out at 4ft 1in so I have the shed board at 2ft 2in by 4ft 1in. To fit in the main line and sidings alongside the shed, to include the prominent housing as a back scene requires a further board 1ft 6in wide giving a total width at the shed end of 3ft 8in... quite deep! These two boards are aligned along their length used C&L machined alignment dowels and joined using 6mm bolts and T nuts. The ajoining pair of boards are reversed, again giving a combined depth of 3ft 8in, in order to accommodate the trackwork. The next pair of boards, where the coaling tower and Ash Plant are to be sited are basically 4ft 1in by 1ft 6in but are made trapezoid to align them with the previous pair. The final board, a single 4ft 1in by 1ft 6in unit will house the trackwork at the throat of the shed yard and will contain Lawrence Hill Signal Box and the Lawrence Hill road bridge as a scenic break. This board has detachable trianglar boards which will accommodate 'urban scenery'. So to sum up we have two large boards [2ft 2in by 4ft 1in] and five small boards [1ft 6in by 4ft 1in] which, when joined together, form a large rectangle tapered towards the Lawrence Hill end. This standard length board has enabled construction of a pair of transport trolleys to be made for exhibition purposes. These are designed to fit into a transit type van. __________________________________________ Comment posted by London Midland Guard on Midland Guard on Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:58 pm I love that paper overlay plan, amazing! Please forgive me but Barrow Road is were in relation to Barton Hill ? I cant wait to see progress, amazing!. Cheers. LMG. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:42 pm London Midland Guard wrote: Please forgive me but Barrow Road is were in relation to Barton Hill ? Hi LMG, You obviously know the Barton Hill area. The duel carriageway aka St Philips Causeway crosses the site and the Barrow Road arches were demolished to make way for this road. The stone wall behind the Formula One service garage - at the junction of the new Days Road - marks the route of the original Days Road around the back of the shed. On the other side of this wall is Barton Hill EWS depot. The EWS depot is adjacent to what was the midland main line which passed alongside the shed under Days Road bridge. In fact, I believe some of the main line track remains in the depot and is used to store visiting steam engines. One of the stone walls which borders the LEX facility forms the rear boundary of the shed site. The LEX site is situated on the site of the gas works at the rear of the shed. The main line continued on a curve to the side of the BIG YELLOW store and to the side of the BINGO hall. In fact this building is suitated where the coaler once stood. The embankment at the rear of the Bingo Hall is formed out of the rubble that once was Barrow Road Arches.The Bingo Hall car park continues up to the Lawrence Hill road bridge which is still there. The only original building remaining in Barrow Road is the Forgemans Arms pub. Hope this helps, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by London Midland Guard on Midland Guard on Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:58 pm I know where i am now, thanks for that. I think Ive actually walked round there once (It was enough ). Many Thanks. LMG. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Tim V on Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:27 pm Does this help? Shows the Barton Hill flats. __________________________________________ Comment posted by timlewis on Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:40 pm barrowroad wrote: Hi Tim, Just looked at your Coldstream link ....looking good. What adhesive have you used on the Exactoscale Foam? Copydex for the first layer, which seems to work pretty well as long as you weight it well while it dries (although I think it would be relatively easy to remove, which may, or may not, be a good thing). The main running lines have two thicknesses, as they are slightly higher than the yard. I have attached this second layer using spray PhotoMount, which was easier and less messy than Copydex BUT, the boards have been lying around for a couple of months since I did this, and the second layer is beginning to peel off a bit along some edges. This may be because I didn't weight them properly, or because I didn't get enough adhesive at the edges (despite 'over-spraying' beyond the edge of the overlay). When I get back onto them (Christmas, work, decorating seem to have got in the way ), I think I'll re-do some with Copydex. London Midland Guard wrote: I love that paper overlay plan, amazing! Such is the power of Templot! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Portchullin Tatty on Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:32 pm Robin, You are going to be busy in the coming months, years................. Then you have to build/convert the engines to go on it! It does look like the beginnings of a fine model though; and as others have said, you do have some positive history in this regard! I look forward to it. Don't use copydex to secure the ballest/track in place. When you subsequently come to do anything with it, such as drill holes for point rodding, it strings on you and you suddenly have a bare patch of foam. Now how do you think I know that...........!! __________________________________________ Comment posted by 10800 on Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:59 pm Look forward to seeing this, especially the roundhouse And another vote for non-rectilinear baseboards (see Eridge rebuilding link below) __________________________________________ Comment posted by ullypug on Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:49 pm Also looking forward to seeing more of this. How did you make the baseboards? i.e. frames, double beams, top down? I'm asking because I have a potential scheme for a roundy roundy that will need some very odd shaped baseboards. Cheers Andrew __________________________________________ Bristol Barrow Road by Barrowroad original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ Comment posted by ullypug on Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:49 pm Also looking forward to seeing more of this. How did you make the baseboards? i.e. frames, double beams, top down? I'm asking because I have a potential scheme for a roundy roundy that will need some very odd shaped baseboards. Cheers Andrew __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:12 pm ullypug wrote: How did you make the baseboards? i.e. frames, double beams, top down? Hi Ullypug, Barrow Road boards are made from sheets of 6mm beech ply cut into strips 110mm wide and 104mm wide for the sides. The depth has been determined by the wish to use tortoise motors. The board sides are made by glueing one piece 110mm [outside] to one piece of 104mm [inside] to give a rebate on the top edge for the board surface, also 66mm sheet. A lightened cross brace of 6mm ply is positioned across the centre point of each side. The resulting box, including the top, was assembled and glued using clamps and the jig in the photograph. Please note one board from 'Brinkley' the S4 Glevum Group layout in the background. The alignment dowels are from C&L and were positioned, two per end and three per side using a jig to drill the holes using a fostner bit. Details of the number of boards and their dimensions can be seen in an earlier post. Cheers...Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by ullypug on Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:11 am Thanks for that Robin I like the idea of laminating two sheets of 6mm and rebating the top. I did something similar with Weston, but used a twin beam a la Barry Norman. Do you plan to add any diagonal bracing? I've never risked not, but I don't know whether it's over the top really. That assembly table looks very impressive. Is it home built? I was thinking about making a jig for the 8 No trapezoidal boards I needs using an old kitchen worktop and some cramps. There's something about a new baseboard... Best of luck! Cheers __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:15 am Hi Andrew, ullypug wrote: Do you plan to add any diagonal bracing? I don't propose to use any diagonal bracing as the boards structure is very rigid. ullypug wrote: That assembly table looks very impressive. Is it home built? The assembly table is owned by my friend Chris in the Glevum S4 Group, without whose assistance and facilities, the boards would not have been built... at least not as accurately! I believe it was originally made to produce consistent 4 x 2 boards for a layout lost in the mists of time. It is certainly a useful piece of kit. Always liked your WCPR layout. Cheers, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by ullypug on Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:04 pm Hi Robin Always liked your WCPR layout. That's very kind. And I like Sheep Pasture too. It fits the 'different' tag which I seem to be drawn to. I've always thought Newquay harbour with its inclined tunnel would make an interesting layout, but that's another story! Cheers __________________________________________ Comment posted by Spot on Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:22 am Nice work on the baseboards, as a Bristolian, now living in Gloucestershire, I am interested in how this is going now. Simon __________________________________________ Comment posted by 70015APOLLO on Sat Jun 06, 2009 6:04 pm Found some more very good colour pix of Barrow Rd shed in the book "British Steam in cameracolour 1962-68" by Robert Adley.Ian Allan book, published 1979 ISBN 0 7110 0987 2 (A4 format, double spreads are A3) P 28/9 Large double spread photo June 1964 - General view of Yard from overbridge, quite a few varied locos. P 60/1 Large double spread photo June 1964 - Unlined green, but clean Brit 70024 Vulcan at side of shed. P 68/9 Large double spread photo June 1964 - 1011 County of Chester in front of shed, gasholder to rear P 78 Single page, again June 1964 - 82004 on local train on main line passing shed. These are very atmospheric photos of workaday steam. In fact the whole book of large colour photos is first class, especially for the weathering effects. Long out of print, I got it for ?‚??1.00 yesterday in a s/h bookshop. Quick look shows 18 on Amazon from ?‚??0.73 - Bagain. Also, June 2009 "Steam Days" mag has an article re Bristol (MR/LMS lines), few photos, nice colour shot of Barrow Rd 1961, & photo of 2 L&Y pugs at rear of shed.. Hope this is of use, Brit15 __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:49 pm Apollo, Many thanks for the information on the Adley book. I do not have a copy but I have seen the photos you have listed. Just purchased a copy of Steam Days. I particularly like the shot of the BR Class 5 showing the trackwork into the shed yard. I am on a track building session at the moment and will, hopefully, and a post on the subject in the near future. Regards, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by michael delamar on Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:11 am this is going to be one fantastic layout, it has all the ingredients. I love sheep pasture, and Petes buildings are fantastic, your woodwork and standards seem very professional too. Im amased nowadays at people building large prototype locations, or what may seem large. maybe thats down to people realising that industrial areas dont actually take up as much space as a country branch say, theres a lot the real railway crammed in to Barrow road there. and of course using scratchbuilt track over rtr enables all the correct angles etc to be used. also having helped out with Lime st many times, the set up and take down with the trolleys will be so much more quicker and less tiring and stressfull than other less well designed or even smaller layouts. Mike __________________________________________ Comment posted by michael delamar on Mon Jun 08, 2009 12:47 pm will there be a way of seeing into the roundhouse? and Im sure youve collected many images of the area, are you looking for more and is there anything you need images of? a shot youve probably seen, a quick search of the net found it, but I thought it had so much atmosphere http://www.railphotoprints.co.uk/index. ... Ds&start=0 Mike __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Jun 08, 2009 5:41 pm Hi Michael, Thank you for your kind comments. I have a large collection of photos of the shed and surrounds but I am always interested in the more unusual shots. The RailPhotoprints shots are excellent, I only discovered them about 6 months ago and obtained a selection of prints. The latest Steam Days magazine has a good number of photos and as an example the unusal shot in this collection has been taken from Lawrence Hill Signal box and gives a wonderful view of the track approaches to the coaler and shed. This is the area where I have made some minor track modifications in order to shorten the layout. This involves the use of a double slip and repositioning of the mainline crossover in order to achieve it. The inside roundhouse will be viewable, achieved by making the west wall and first pitch of the roof out of perspex, at least that is my idea at present. Regards, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by alcazar on Tue Jun 16, 2009 9:28 am Can't wait to see more of this: Barrow Road was one of those sheds whose name you stared at in your combine and wondered what it was like. Being from Humberside, I never did get to find out The first jubilee I ever saw was off barrow Road, circa 1962, seen at Wath North, (in the old West riding), hauling the southbound Devonian. I was 10. Barfleur was the Jube, I still remember the whoop of delight from the older lad who'd taken me, since it was a "cop" for him too. The next time I went, three months later, the Devonian was in the hands of the Peaks, D9, Snowdon, and the next time, D100, Sherwood Forester. Not jubes, but.,........... __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:33 pm I am in the process of making the point work for the layout with 6 out of the 15 required turnouts completed - I must get round to posting a few photos. Alcazar you are of the same sort of vintage as myself.. fortunately I had relatives in Hull and paid two visits in the early 60's. I used the visits as an excuse to pay my respects to the Hull sheds, York and even a visit to Gateshead... interesting days. __________________________________________ Comment posted by mikemeg on Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:47 pm I've just come across this thread and what a joy. There's one picture of a Patriot, posed under the coaling tower, with the caption indicating that this loco - currently 45543 - will become 45519 - Lady Godiva. When I was a kid in Hull and made my first trip to York, train spotting (1958), I was fascinated by the locos on the Bristol - Newcastle services, often LMS Patriots or Jubilees and, quite often, from Bristol Barrow Road. I checked back through the notebook for that first trip to York (one of the few railway things which survived later parental clear outs) and there it is 45519 - Lady Godiva. I can still see it in my minds eye as it came into York, so different from the works of Worsdell, Raven, Gresley, Thompson and Peppercorn. There is a wonderful painting, by Philip Hawkins, of a Patriot (I think it's 45504) at Birmingham New Street - look on his web site. Also being another who is making a model of a railway (which this one is) as opposed to a model railway,then it's an added bonus. Many congratulations on a fascinating prototype and I look forward to seeing this evolve; it will be absolutely stunning. Regards Mike PS The Patriot picture is not featured on Philip Hawkins web site, currently, but if you Google LMS Patriot, you will find the site of the organisation, currently building a brand new Patriot and, under the link Appreciation, you will find this picture. It's actually 45506 so the memory really is failing, but oh what a picture. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:24 pm Excellent picture of 45506 Mike.. another Bristol engine. Thanks for your kind comments. Regards, Robin __________________________________________ Comment posted by Mallard60022 on Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:29 pm I'm absolutely blown away by this layout. It is going to be fantastic. I only ever went to B Road once on a trip to Bristol (and why did I not go out to Bath Green Park - idiot), in 1963 or 64 (can't quite remember without climbing into loft to dig out spotters' books). I was thrown out (gently) after covering most of the yard but never got 'inside' and I always wondered what it was like. I just remember it being a great and atmospheric shed with those arches splitting the site and the long 'stairway to heaven' from the road (Day's Bridge?) down to the yard. I'm sure local lads used the secret entrances around the back by those gas-ometers? In another posting on here some time ago someone mentioned the coaler being blown up in the late 60's and scaring half Bristol to death! Incidentally, I bunked St Phillip's Marsh, (lovely double roundhouse), with ease but was too scared by the 'reputation' of the Bath Road staff to attempt a bunk! As soon as the trackwork is down and buildings erected I would love to see it exhibited. If you have limited loco stock just now you could invite P4 boys (& girls) to bring their appropriate stock to visit the shed! Even if you don't go public I for one would pay a good fee to visit and admire! Very good luck, Stan Eight Freight. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:27 pm The rear entrance for spotters was over the wall at the rear of the shed. For a nostalgic view see this link. http://www.flickr.com/photos/fray_bento ... 155572977/ We used to cycle round the back, prop the bike against the wall, climb over and enter the back entrance to the roundhouse. This is a 1981 shot, taken long after the shed had been demolished and shows one of the attempts to prevent us getting in, namely the fence. Like the Maginot Line it stopped at the end of this abutting wall and did not continue over the bridge itself so we climbed around it's end. Prior to the fence some nasty black tar/paint was put on the wall. The coaling tower was demolished in mid/late 60's. I have a large number of loco kits to build or RTR conversions to do. However, I do have some locos for the layout and friends in the Glevum Scalefour group have others to fill the gap. The layout is intended to be exhibited - it may even male an show appearance in an unfinished state. Thanks for your kind comments. Robin __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:30 pm Just noticed the Flickr link has not fully uploaded. fray_bentos/240857220/in/set-72157594155572977/ add this after photos/ Robin __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:19 pm I thought it about time I did an update on my progress with the trackwork. So far I have built about half of the required pointwork. Starting from the north entrance/exit to the shed the following have been completed:- North Crossover Down Main C8Lc North Crossover Up Main C8Lc North Exit B8R North Exit Double Slip 1:6 Coaling Road Turnout B6Rc Wagon Siding Turnout B7Rc Coal Plant Wagon Road B6R In addition I have just finished the 3 Way Loco Sidings consisting of Loco sidings 3-Way B8Lc Loco sidings 3-Way C10Rc 3 Way Crossing 1:6 The position of this 3 Way is shown in the attached templot The finished 3 Way - all pointwork still requires the addition of cosmetic chairs which will be added following positioning and final adjustment - is shown along with the other piece of complicated pointwork, the part completed Tandem crossing, which will be positioned underneath the Arches of Barrow Road Bridge/Viaduct. Right, back to the workbench - Australia 128 for 5!!!! __________________________________________ Comment posted by michael delamar on Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:38 am really nice work on the track I like the shots of the coaling stage being demolished too Mike __________________________________________ Comment posted by Mallard60022 on Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:05 pm barrowroad wrote: I thought it about time I did an update on my progress with the trackwork. So far I have built about half of the required pointwork. Starting from the north entrance/exit to the shed the following have been completed:- North Crossover Down Main C8Lc North Crossover Up Main C8Lc North Exit B8R North Exit Double Slip 1:6 Coaling Road Turnout B6Rc Wagon Siding Turnout B7Rc Coal Plant Wagon Road B6R Barrow Road North Exit trackwork 3.jpgBarrow Road North Exit trackwork.jpg In addition I have just finished the 3 Way Loco Sidings consisting of Loco sidings 3-Way B8Lc Loco sidings 3-Way C10Rc 3 Way Crossing 1:6 The position of this 3 Way is shown in the attached templot Templot of 3 Way Crossing.jpg The finished 3 Way - all pointwork still requires the addition of cosmetic chairs which will be added following positioning and final adjustment - is shown along with the other piece of complicated pointwork, the part completed Tandem crossing, which will be positioned underneath the Arches of Barrow Road Bridge/Viaduct. Tandem & 3 Way Crossing 006.jpg Right, back to the workbench - Australia 128 for 5!!!! England 1 Aussies 0!! Very interesting to see your trackwork up close. Stud and wood I presume? I've just spent some time experimenting with trackbuilding in the various mediums including C & L on wood; works quite well (using Butanone) but the 'point' has not been used on a layout so strength is unknown! Keep the pics coming please. England's next victory should spur you on! Sincerely 82E __________________________________________ Comment posted by Mallard60022 on Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:00 am Re. this layout and Black Gill! I believe we could have a competition to see if Barrow Hill can match Black Gill for beauty and atmosphere. Any progress on Barrow Hill? Please don't hide this one away until I'm too old to operate this computer! Sincerely, P.Fourboys __________________________________________ Comment posted by ikks on Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:38 am Brilliant, I love this apect of our hobby.......living in Derby for my first 24 years and being a very active "spotter" between 1958 and 1963, Barrow Road engines were a regular part of my diet. Great work...look forward to following this thread. Rgds....Mike __________________________________________
-
More Templotting on Bodmin
martin_wynne commented on The Fatadder's blog entry in Bodmin Central - Closed
Hi Rich, I've added a few Templot comments at: http://www.rmweb.co....ting-on-bodmin/ regards, Martin. -
Bodmin Central: Another short track entry...
The Fatadder commented on The Fatadder's blog entry in Bodmin Central - Closed
Just realised that I had managed to switch the first post in the blog to draft (hiding it from view), which kind of answers some of these questions. Anyway.... The layout is in P4, with flat bottom track work which will be built using the Colin Craig range of parts for points and Exactoscale for plain track, the Wenford branch and the siding at the front are bullhead and will both be built from Exactoscale components. Things such as the engine shed & storage sidings which can be seen on the B&W railway today are not being modelled (given that if the line was still in active service these wouldn't have been built (and the originals wouldnt have survived.) Its a bit of a shame really as a small fuel point in that location would have added a few extra movements, but my thinking is that with both Laira and St Blazey so near, its just not needed. (though despite saying that, I may well go back to Templot and have a play to see how it would look............ -
Bodmin Central: Another short track entry...
The Fatadder posted a blog entry in Bodmin Central - Closed
Well thats the track plan pretty much sorted, at least until the accurate templates arrive and I can start gluing them down to the baseboard. With a bit of luck I may even get baseboard no3 built at the weekend (though given my dislike of woodwork I doubt that...) This evening has been spent working on a CAD drawing of the whole layout, working around the templot drawing to add in the platforms, buildings and bridge. Still needs a lot of tweaking to get things in the right place (particularly with the bridge which I havent properly scaled to size yet). I've also made a start on drawing an approximation of the footbridge, although because the roadbridge isnt quite right yet the footbridge is currently too near to the running line. The next job: finish working on the bridge so that I can start working out the rest of the buildings... Attached below is a full copy of the track plan. (word of warning, you will probably need to scroll across to see all of the full version of this image!) -
The last day or so has been spent doing yet more fine tuning to the Templot plan for Bodmin, Focusing on more small improvements to alignment, and more importantly sorting out the sleepers. This results in a change from this: to this: Much tidier! There is still a fair bit more to do, with the Sleeper spacing still needing to be corrected on to concrete track (still more reading of the manual needed to work out how to have two different sleeper spacings on the layout without manually moving each sleeper!) but its getting there. Once I have sorted out that final issue, the next job is going to be printing out the templates and seeing how the templates for the points compare with the Colin Craig ones I intend to build from. (If not theres going to be more modifications needed to get the two plans to match up!) Once thats done, theres not a lot more that can be worked on until I start buying track components....
-
Back to Templot and messing around with Bodmin's track plan. Having failed completely at my first attempt at printing the track plan, I've now noticed that there is still a fair bit of work to do before its going to be ready to start sticking down on baseboards. At the moment it looks like there are 3 main jobs to do. Firstly some of the track is not properly connected together (ie its just arranged by eye), I'd prefer to get this connected up to make sure the alignment is spot on before I go and print it. But I seem to remember having a few issues with this in the first place (hence giving up and just bodging it together!) The next job is a bit more important (potentially), which is moving all of the point sleepers which are overlapping so that they are in the right place. Of course not knowing what the right place is makes this a bit more fun! (not to mention I am struggling with the Templot website's search function trying to find something that tells me how to do it...) The final job for the evening is going to be converting the track so that it has the correct sleeper spacing for FB track (so that I can easily sort out the incorrect spacing on the Exactoscale bases.) Again having found the appropriate instructions I proceeded to be confused by imperial data entry!) The big problem I have at the moment is that I need to have a mixture of BH (a couple of sidings and the branchline) and FB (the mainline and all but one point). Not a very productive night so far, so hopefully it will get better..... Anyway I've added the full trackplan below
-
Thanks John, I created a B8 template in Templot (an excellent piece of software). The 2mm Association also provide templates (and jigs) for point building. The only trouble is that now I'm tempted to make a 'proper' 2mmFS point. Shame I haven't got anything to run through it.
-
This blog aims to cover the development, and eventual construction of my next layout, Bodmin Central. The layout is based around three assumptions detailing how the town of Bodmin developed in this alternative reality, Firstly, I have kept a number of closed lines open, covering both the line to Bodmin General, and the second branch to Wentford (which will be further serving the north Cornish coast. To further ensure maximum interest, the Wentford clay works will still be operational (and rail served) insuring significant freight traffic. Other rail served works on the line (such as Fitzgerald Lighting), are assumed to be fully operational. The second assumption considers the population of the area, in practice the population of Bodmin is just too small to require the sort of intensive passenger service that I would ideally like to operate in exhibition conditions, to counter this I have decided to assume that in this reality the population of Bodmin is significantly higher. This is then further compounded by taking a summer setting for the layout, allowing additional summer services (based upon the Wessex trains 31 rake). The final assumption is that due to the increased usage, the line was rebuilt in the 80s using modern flat bottom track and colour light signals, The main reasoning for choseing this boils down to wanting to try something a bit different (given few layouts have accurately modelled Flat Bottom track), this will be modelled using the Colin Craig range of parts (that are due for release soon), all signals will be scratch built and fully working. My modelling covers a couple of distinct periods, principally the 80s (covering 84/85 and 87/88) and post privatisation (covering 98/99 and 04-06), as such the layout will be designed from the outset to allow for easy conversion between these two periods. With replacement station signs, road vehicles and some other details, with the possible addition of some interchangeable buildings (although that will only be if the joint between building and ground can be adequately hidden. Specification: P4 DCC Turnout operation by Tortoise motors controlled by a single control panel Cassette based fiddleyard, sized to be able to hold at least a 5 coach voyager Much be able to be operated by a minimal number of people, preferably 2 or less. Operation wise, there will be freight coming into the station to run around and head up the branch (and vice versa), this will be mostly comprised of china clay wagons (Tigers, Clayhoods, CDA, bullets along with Vans), along with a mixed bunch of trains serving other speedlink type stuff. also tempted to add some kind of cement facility (off sceen somewhere) as part of my 'improvements' to Bodmin. Passenger wise it will mostly be a unit railway, with plenty of variation. Some liberty will be taken with the TOC boundrys to get a summer south west trains service terminating here (allowing use of my 159s), with local services by Wessex (or Wales & West) 150/153/158, along with services by Virgin XC. Track plan. The track plan is scaled from an accurate map of the area, following the general path of the existing line, however there has been the addition of the extra platform, and switch back siding to add a little extra interest. Building wise there will be the main station building and signal box (both based upon the prototype) along with two 80s prefab platform shelters (this is one building which because of how these structures weathered, will need one set for 80s and one for later). Other prototype buildings include the road bridge and the engine shed (the original) which I am aiming to convert into some kind of small business. The rest will be fully dependent on how much space is left... At the moment a rough copy of the templot plan is slowly taking shape on my floor (alas I didnt calibrate the printer, so the actual templates are worthless), the idea here is to get a good impression of the size required for the layout, along with checking point motor alignment, points over baseboard joints etc. I also hope to get a better idea as to the area available for other buildings.
-
Eridge (P4) rebuilding by 10800 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ Comment posted by pinkmouse on Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:27 pm Yup, first board done in very fetching pink and black. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:31 pm pinkmouse wrote: Yup, first board done in very fetching pink and black. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat May 02, 2009 5:02 pm Steady progress being made on ballasting and tracklaying on all the plain track sections. This was all done before the discovery of the use of Johnson's Klear for ballasting Once the plain track is done, the P&C work will be done ex-situ and ballasted after fitting. In fact the first bits are under way now, so there may be some pics of that soon. When the trackbed boards were cut we were using a Templot printout based on A3 sheets joined together. Despite care in joining the individual sheets, there was a offset discrepancy of about 2 inches over the 25 ft overall length discovered when we used a single roll-plotted printout. Fortunately the turnout on the left foreground here is only a trap point so we can just get away with it. __________________________________________ Comment posted by martin_wynne on Sun May 03, 2009 3:51 am 10800 wrote: When the trackbed boards were cut we were using a Templot printout based on A3 sheets joined together. Despite care in joining the individual sheets, there was a offset discrepancy of about 2 inches over the 25 ft overall length discovered when we used a single roll-plotted printout. Hi Rod, That's an error of 0.67% which I would regard as significant. Templot includes a printer calibration function for the highest accuracy when printing directly. But it's not available for exported DXF files, and using it with commercial PDF printing firms means a double trip to the print shop. For DXF files you can make your own correction via the print scaling function, but again it means two trips to the printer (and adding some background reference lines to the file). The most likely causes of a mismatch are: 1. Use of a laser printer instead of ink-jet or other cold printer. Laser printers heat the paper, causing it to shrink and distort slightly. Ink-jet printing is recommended for the highest accuracy when printing from Templot. 2. Uncalibrated roll printer. Over a 25ft length any variation from the quoted dpi figure can be significant. On a heavily-used commercial printer the most likely cause is wear of the print roller. 3. Wide variation of ambient conditions in which the paper or printouts were stored. For laser printing, paper which has been stored in damp conditions will shrink noticeably when printed. Sorry to hijack your topic, I'm never quite sure of the correct form to adopt when responding to a side issue like this. The layout is looking good! regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by pinkmouse on Sun May 03, 2009 8:49 am Martin, I doubt very much that any of us involved in Eridge consider it a hijack. This is however interesting information about the issue of laser printers, it is something I had in the back of my mind from using a laser to create PCB artwork, but as I don't work with the very tiniest of SMT components with the tight tolerances involved, it was never an issue, however I can now see how it creates problems with a design on such a large scale as this. Still, nothing we can do about it now, just something to bear in mind for Eridge MkIII. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun May 03, 2009 1:07 pm Hi Martin Maybe you misunderstood me, or I expressed it badly, it wasn't an error in overall scaling, just a lateral shift due to (my) cumulative errors in sticking a lot of A3 sheets together when we cut the baseboard tops compared with the single roll plot being used now for trackbuilding. Lengthwise it was spot on. __________________________________________ Comment posted by craigwelsh on Mon May 04, 2009 10:23 pm Looking good Rod, we'll be going through all this in a couple of months when we start relaying the main lines on Slattocks following the S4 Soc AGM.. I've had access to a 42inch wide roll plotter so we used that to print out the yard and it will be used for the main section, it certainly is a lot easier than sticking bits of A3 together. We've been relaying the yard but keeping the points in place and it proved 'interesting trying to tie the Templot print out to the points that had been laid. Hopefully it'll all be working again by the AGM though. Interesting how you ballast all the sleepers before laying the rail.. I assume these are all still 1/2 height sleepers? __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon May 04, 2009 10:54 pm Thanks Craig Yes they're half-height sleepers with rivet holes, which help in placing the rail (once ballasted you can't see the Templot print any more ) although rivets aren't being used on the plain track, just Exactoscale chairs glued to the sleepers. P&C work is being done separately before ballasting and using rivets at crossing vees etc. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:51 pm Some pointwork now being installed in between the lengths of plain line And a couple of shots showing the board-end "track strengthening" process - PCB with brass bar onto which sleepers are threaded (if we remember ) and rail is soldered to. The sleepers are currently loose but will be bedded into the ballast and cosmetic half-chairs added in due course. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:21 pm 10800 wrote: the board-end "track strengthening" process - PCB with brass bar onto which sleepers are threaded ................. and rail is soldered to Hmm, interesting.... food for thought, I think... __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:07 pm The idea is that (unlike just soldering the rail to copperclad) you can still use chairs and maintain a gap between the rails and the sleepers. __________________________________________ Comment posted by jim s-w on Sun Jun 14, 2009 9:32 am Looking great Rod Are you sure the check rails and wing rails wouldn't be combined in a crossing though? I dont know about your era but they sometimes are now a days. Cheers Jim __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:01 pm Jim, presume you mean extending the wing rails to be the check rails for the opposite crossing? It seems logical in some respects, but I haven't seen it done much in the 50s/60s even if it only means leaving a short gap. __________________________________________ Comment posted by jim s-w on Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:04 pm Thats right Rod I did wonder if it was a more recent thing. Cheers Jim __________________________________________ Comment posted by Andy G on Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:27 pm It was quite common in the Manchester area in the 50s and 60s and Slattocks will feature them, but it does seem to be a case of checking the prototype at the appropriate date. Andy __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:49 pm While having a few days off I'm cracking on with building some of the Eridge pointwork ex situ. This is the crossover from the down loop into the goods yard, with trap point and entry to the end dock. Here's the Templot printout laid out with ply sleepers already in position (rivets on a few of them). This is actually the bit nearest the camera in the very first photo in this topic on the old version of the layout. After planning out and threading on the chairs - including key direction, as this is bidirectional I opted for alternating except next to fishplates where the keys have to be pointing the other way - I decided to solder on the brass fishplates before laying the rail (in places where only a cosmetic rail join is needed). Despite the Brassmasters packet these are old Colin Waite ones. The steel rail is quite old too, hence the rust - realistic huh? First 'straight' stock rail fixed, covering two turnouts. First vee (1:8) in position, gauges in place (the block gauge just acting to stop the nose of the vee going tight to gauge with respect to the stock rail). And the vee in place. The red marks are where physical rail joins are required, not just cosmetic ones (for polarity control). Hopefully more to come tomorrow (off out to the jazz tonight ) __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:44 pm It's really spooky to see someone else's version of the same prototype! Ralph Burrows' depiction of Eridge in MRJ 192 is very nice indeed, but he did have six years start on us, and I presume he hasn't torn it all up and started again either! It doesn't say what gauge it is, although I guess it's 00 just from the references to moving straight from Peco to copperclad and to using RTR stock without mentioning conversion - so that would speed things up as well. It says something for the operational interest in the prototype, because that is four versions that I know of - this one, ours, Vivien Thompson's somewhat disappointing one that was in RM a couple of years ago, and another home-tied EM version somewhere in Cheshire (which I think is set in LBSCR days). __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:26 pm More on the turnouts The Martin Wynne (well that's where I got it) method of forming obtuse angles in wing rails - couple of rail offcuts, small screwdriver, jeweller's hammer, light tap and there you are (only two hands and no tripod available so no action shots!) Wing rail being fitted using flangeway, triangular and block gauges - spot the mistake (rectified later ) in the last chair on the right! Exactoscale insulated fishplate in place for the switch rail Switch rail fitted, and completed common crossing (will do check rails later) __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:03 pm A couple of shots showing a bit more tracklaying progress - now almost got one line complete end to end __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dave Holt on Sun Aug 30, 2009 3:06 pm Rod, This is looking very nice, indeed, look forward to further progress. The sweep of the curve on the main line is just crying out for a re-built West Country with 12 on, flat out! - And I've got just to loco!! Keep up the good work. Dave. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:28 pm Thanks Dave, we might borrow your WC one day! It would have to accelerate pretty sharpish out of the (extended!) fiddle yard though, and the 12 on might have to be mainly Gresley or Thompson (?) bogie pigeon vans for authenticity - passenger services usually only went to 7 or 8. __________________________________________
-
Camping mat, supports and control panel
10800 posted a blog entry in Eridge Mk 2 - rebuild of a P4 layout
Eridge (P4) rebuilding by 10800 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:25 pm Looking good... I don't think those boards are going to bend at all..! A quick question on the ply you are using if that's okay, as you seem to be pretty well versed on the best timber to use now, and more specifically, what NOT to use... I see you are using 6mm russian ply, but looking on the B&Q website, I noticed some 12.5mm Tropical softwood ply. Would this do the job? The application is a 7mm test track. Any info appreciated. Thanks. Jonathan. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:02 pm Hi Jonathan Only comment I would make is that 12.5 mm might be a bit OTT even for O gauge, and also that received wisdom suggests that DIY superstore plywood is rarely of good enough quality for flat and stable baseboard needs. I would seek out advice from a proper local timber merchant, who likely as not can also cut it for you as well to whatever plan you provide. HTH __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:24 pm 10800 wrote: maybe even some drinking in one of them Ah, so you'll be having a cup of tea in the old station masters house, will you?... __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:35 pm Captain Kernow wrote: 10800 wrote: maybe even some drinking in one of them Ah, so you'll be having a cup of tea in the old station masters house, will you?... Doubt it, there's a bl**dy fierce-sounding guard dog in residence! __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:36 pm Thanks for that Rod (10800). Jonathan. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:16 pm Latest developments - the trackbed boards have now been kitted out with Exactoscale camping mat foam trackbases And an impression of the track plan with a draft Templot print out on top Over-centre catches hold the boards together (there are dowels for alignment as well of course) The support frames are fixed together in pairs by x-pattern struts. This makes them extremely stable. The fixing points are slotted so that the retaining wing-nuts only need to be loosened slightly to dismantle them, rather than laboriously unscrewed altogether. Mike's prototype for a system of strengthening rail fixings and board ends. Two pairs of brass rod pass through the ply and a piece of copperclad ###### to it. They also pass through the ply sleepers (only one so equipped in this demo piece) and are then soldered to the rail. Ballast is then built up. Why is this any better than just soldering the rail directly to brass pins or copperclad you ask? - well, it means the end sleepers can be properly chaired and ballasted, without (hopefully) compromising on strength. Regarding the plug-in scenic boards, which will be very lightweight using foamboard carcasses, Chris had the excellent idea of using magnets to attach them to the trackbed boards. There then followed an increasingly silly conversation of using mini rare-earth magnets to hold the trackbed boards together, and ideas of from how far away you could throw the scenic boards at the layout when assembling it at shows __________________________________________ Comment posted by ullypug on Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:43 pm Mmm interesting. I've used the cast brass chairs at baseboard ends myself but your solution's got me thinking... I wondered whether your system could be modified to allow a degree of re-adjustment by soldering threaded bar to the underside of the rail, passing through a larger tube through an oversize hole in the baseboard with a plate/captive nut underneath. Then I wondered 'but would you need to?' It's one thing I worry about with P4 exhibition layouts (I haven't done a show with mine yet ). Best of luck with your project __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:22 pm Thanks Andrew - as you say, not sure why any 'adjustment' would be required; the function of the soldering is to hold the rail firmly in the same place and avoid risk of catching them on carpet, trousers etc (there will be end-protector plates as well). The expectation is that the soldered connections will be stronger than the alternative reliance on soldering to rivets and/or glue holding the sleeper to the trackbed. __________________________________________ Comment posted by philip-griffiths on Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:25 pm Rod, I like the X-struts and their fixing mechanisms, excellent. Novel, or plagiarised? regards __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:11 am Thanks Philip. The x-struts weren't my idea, so I don't know whether it was a new or 'plagiarised' concept. Doesn't really matter, we all take inspiration and ideas from others, and we're not marketing it commercially! Regards __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:49 pm There may be a bit of a hiatus at the Kent end of Eridge (Reconstruction) plc due to summer holidays, but down here in south Devon (where it's always holiday time! ) there is still plenty of design work going on, mainly for the new panel. Beast66606 can look away temporarily , but Eridge will continue to be DC/Cab Control for the time being, although there will be some refinements to the earlier boards - nothing too fancy, but the option of route selection LEDs on the panel indicating whether or not a section is switched in, and to which controller, seems to carry favour. I have also developed a conceptual lever frame, based as closely as possible on the real one, and which coincidentally also comes out at 32 levers. This will be represented by a bank of switches along the bottom of the panel, although in the future it would be nice to replace it with an actual model frame. DCC may happen in the future also, especially when steam sound chips improve, and the wiring will be done so that the changeover is a doddle. So I will set to work on the panel down here, and will bring each 8 foot trackbed board down to the south west once tracklaying is completed (plus TOUs and rail droppers) so that I can do all the wiring and testing at home in relative leisure. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Brinkly on Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:43 pm Hi Rod, I was just looking through your thread and there is some excellent information here. I saw the orginal Eridge in Railway Modeller and thought how excellent it was, along with your advice reading lofts and model railways! I am currently thinking of planning and building a layout built to P4 standards and I look forward to seeing Eridge MK2 progressing. Nick __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:05 pm Hi Nick Bit of mistaken identity there - I am not Vivien Thompson and Eridge Mk1 was not the one that appeared in RM! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Brinkly on Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:21 am 10800 wrote: Hi Nick Bit of mistaken identity there - I am not Vivien Thompson and Eridge Mk1 was not the one that appeared in RM! Oh Whooops! Very sorry! Well Rod your version of Eridge is very good and I hope that it will also appear in a railway modelling magazine in the future! She certainly is a beast! What will the total lenght be once completed? __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:41 pm 10800 wrote: Bit of mistaken identity there - I am not Vivien Thompson Not even when he's at DRAG!.... Edit - go on, you were expecting some inconsequential bo**ocks from me like the above, weren't you?! __________________________________________ Comment posted by 50007 on Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:44 pm That is going to be a great layout with those huge boards! Can I please ask what the black mattings purpose will be? Is it for noise reduction? Thanks __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:16 pm Brinkly wrote: 10800 wrote: Bit of mistaken identity there - I am not Vivien Thompson and Eridge Mk1 was not the one that appeared in RM! Oh Whooops! Very sorry! Well Rod your version of Eridge is very good and I hope that it will also appear in a railway modelling magazine in the future! She certainly is a beast! What will the total lenght be once completed? No problem Nick, and thanks, although as I mentioned on here when the RM article came out I was a bit disappointed with Vivien's rendition given her pedigree as one of the top modellers of buildings from the 70s and 80s. But at least hers is finished and she is building up a huge fleet of locos and trains to run a day's authentic service. Total length of our scenic section will be 26ft, and with an 8ft fiddle yard at each end that will be 42ft in total. Not sure when we will be ready to exhibit, although we are booked at least for Scaleforum 2011 already. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:20 pm 50007 wrote: Can I please ask what the black mattings purpose will be? Is it for noise reduction? It's just an alternative trackbed material to cork - not specifically for noise reduction, which in exhibition conditions is a bit pointless, but should be easy to carve out a ballast shoulder in due course. It's like camping mattress material, although this comes from Exactoscale. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:22 pm Captain Kernow wrote: Not even when he's at DRAG!.... Edit - go on, you were expecting some inconsequential bo**ocks from me like the above, weren't you?! I would have been mightily disappointed otherwise __________________________________________ Comment posted by 50007 on Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:28 pm 10800 wrote: 50007 wrote: Can I please ask what the black mattings purpose will be? Is it for noise reduction? It's just an alternative trackbed material to cork - not specifically for noise reduction, which in exhibition conditions is a bit pointless, but should be easy to carve out a ballast shoulder in due course. It's like camping mattress material, although this comes from Exactoscale. Oh i see. Thanks for explaining it to me. That stuff must be easy to cut and provide a smooth line. Is it cheaper than cork? __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 pm 50007 wrote: [is it cheaper than cork? This stuff is ??????‚??5 for a sheet of 1.5m x 0.5m x 1/8in and is called 'Foamlay' - see http://www.p4track.co.uk/ I don't know what the equivalent in cork sheet would be. __________________________________________ Comment posted by 50007 on Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:02 pm 10800 wrote: 50007 wrote: [is it cheaper than cork? This stuff is ??????‚??5 for a sheet of 1.5m x 0.5m x 1/8in and is called 'Foamlay' - see http://www.p4track.co.uk/ I don't know what the equivalent in cork sheet would be. That's really good. So you could do a whole layout, then lay your track and just cut away the foam. I dont like when with the cork you have to lay your cork as you lay the track! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Brinkly on Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:35 pm 10800 wrote: Brinkly wrote: 10800 wrote: Bit of mistaken identity there - I am not Vivien Thompson and Eridge Mk1 was not the one that appeared in RM! Oh Whooops! Very sorry! Well Rod your version of Eridge is very good and I hope that it will also appear in a railway modelling magazine in the future! She certainly is a beast! What will the total lenght be once completed? No problem Nick, and thanks, although as I mentioned on here when the RM article came out I was a bit disappointed with Vivien's rendition given her pedigree as one of the top modellers of buildings from the 70s and 80s. But at least hers is finished and she is building up a huge fleet of locos and trains to run a day's authentic service. Total length of our scenic section will be 26ft, and with an 8ft fiddle yard at each end that will be 42ft in total. Not sure when we will be ready to exhibit, although we are booked at least for Scaleforum 2011 already. I am sure that it will be ready on time Rod, bags of time between now and 2011! Captain Kernow wrote: 10800 wrote: Bit of mistaken identity there - I am not Vivien Thompson Not even when he's at DRAG!.... Do I need to know something about DRAG CK!? I don't want to have to wear Hannah's clothes! Nick __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:48 am Here's a pic of the front of the new Eridge control panel before I cover it with transparent film and start drilling holes in it for switches, LEDs etc. Everyone has their own needs, ideas and preferences on panels ranging from Chris Nevard's tobacco tin to Railroad&Co 'no panel required' - this is a 'conventional' panel for DC cab control. Each section (15, separated by black marks) will have a rotary switch which can be allocated to any of four controllers. The 'lever frame' emulates the real one as far as possible in terms of numbering, and the appropriate numbers for points (doubles for crossovers where appopriate) and signals are marked on the diagram. There will also be a LED-based route indicator system linked to the rotary switches which will show which sections are linked to which controller - not essential, but something indicated as a 'nice-to-have' by team members. The red, blue and yellow sections of the track diagram mean nothing other than a convenient visual separation of up, down and yard sections. I'll put up more on the behind-the-scenes progress as I work through it if this is of interest. __________________________________________ Comment posted by martin_wynne on Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:23 pm 10800 wrote: Each section (15, separated by black marks) will have a rotary switch which can be allocated to any of four controllers. Hi Rod, That's not always a good idea. It means that you cannot change a section from controller A to controller C without momentarily connecting it to controller B. Which may be in use at the time. The simple solution is to add on-off section switches for each section, and remember to switch a section off while changing controllers. Other solutions are latching push-buttons (as in old-style car radios) where pushing one releases all the others. Or you can emulate that with solid-state circuits and/or relays, but doing that 15 times over would be a lot of work. Another solution is a plug panel. 4 jack sockets in a row. Insert a shorting jack plug into whichever one you want. This doubles as an on-off switch by removing the jack plug and putting it into a 5th dummy socket, or your pocket. er, DCC? regards, Martin. __________________________________________ -
Eridge (P4) rebuilding by 10800 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:49 pm Bye bye Eridge Mark 1 (and long live Mark 2!) __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:05 am Some progress on baseboard construction this weekend. Templot plan cut to give 1.5" margin from the sleeper ends and used as a template for cutting the trackbed surfaces from 6mm Russian birch ply. The two further boards have already been cut (each 8ft long) - Mike is marking out the third. Simon keeps his wine rack in the garage hence the handy use of bottles as weights to hold the track plan down ! First two boards with transverse ribs in place (8" deep). First board with side frames glued, pinned and clamped in place. This is the only one where the sides themselves are curved - the others will have rectilinear boxes (and triangles on the wider bits) with longitudinal strengtheners as well, so there will be some bits where the trackbed overhangs the box-frame sides slightly (not sure what the bottles were being used for at this stage!). The trackbed boards will sit on wider trestles or goalpost-type supports at 4ft intervals (but with the board joins mid-way between supports to avoid any tendency to sag from that point). Scenic add-ons will plug in from the sides, probably built on super-lightweight carcasses made from foam board shaped to fit. __________________________________________ Comment posted by nobby on Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:13 pm You guys obviously like a "drink" with your layout building __________________________________________ Comment posted by 7F 2-8-0 on Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:50 pm This is now starting to get interesting, I will be keeping tabs on this one even more now __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:52 pm Current thinking is for the overall layout to be 3 ft 9 in across, the difference in width over the trackbed being made up by the plug-in scenic modules. Not hugely different in appearance from Mk1, but there will be more scenic width at the 'London' end for viewers to look across in front of the tracks, maybe up to 2 ft 6 in, down the slope to the cutting, and hopefully giving a stronger impression of trains in the landscape. We will also be 'closing the loops' at the 'country' end with the opportunity to include the station master's house, water tank and with a bit of lateral compression 'The Huntsman' pub. This will involve another short scenic section of about 2ft length which will bridge to the down fiddle yard; and there will be two additional turnouts, one more trap point, two more running signals (down starters) and one more ground signal. Should be worth it though (and it will make the fiddle yard entry more straightforward). __________________________________________ Comment posted by 7F 2-8-0 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am I have been thinking about this most of the day and surely this method of baseboard construction must make the operation of the layout that much better as you are reducing the number of baseboard joins by half? Shaun __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:11 am Well that's what really started us off Shaun, the previous boards sagged between the joins creating the familiar ski-jump effect at the joins themselves. In P4 this was a disaster, although there was never much problem with the trackwork itself. Given that we need a Luton type van to carry everything anyway - possibly because we never got round to designing carriers properly - we thought we might as well make use of the space and at the same time improve the robustness of the boards by making them deeper at the sides and having fewer of them. It also meant that there were fewer (now virtually none) constraints on the detailed track plan - turnouts over joins etc - and most of the turnouts would all be on one board. Obviously at 8ft long they couldn't all be open frame full-width construction, hence the solid boards as narrow as practicable for the track, and lightweight scenery add-ons that don't need to be as robust because they are not carrying any trains. Here are some sectional sketches of how we think it might finally look at the moment - they go left to right from the operator side, or London to country on the prototype. The red lines are the trackbed boards, and the heavy black lines mark the supports and extent of the scenic add-ons. The grid is 1ft (overall length about 26 ft). Thanks for your interest . __________________________________________ Comment posted by number6 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:55 am Very interesting. The staggering of joins in the baseboard will also help hide them I guess - as they won't often cross the whole width of the boards. You could possibly have alternative seasonal landscape add-ons! Winter, Spring, Snow etc! Ok maybe not... Remind me why the baseboards are so deep? Does this add to the structural strength? Raphael __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:01 am number6 wrote: Remind me why the baseboards are so deep? Does this add to the structural strength? That's the principal reason Raphael, but also they have to accommodate Tortoise motors, signal operating units and above all some lower level scenic features, especially the river crossing. It is probably a bit OTT though, something like 4 inches would probably have worked, but we just wanted to make absolutely sure! There will not be a Mk3! __________________________________________ Comment posted by 7F 2-8-0 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:25 am It does make sense, as a group if you are building an exhibition layout why stick to the time honoured tradition of 4 foot boards due to weight, as a group there will be more than 1 of you at an exhibition to help with lifting? Shaun __________________________________________ Comment posted by jim s-w on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:33 am Hi Rod Will be following this with interest. The solid trackbed light scenic idea is what I am using on New Street. OK it doesnt look that way ATM but its all track! Cheers Jim __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:35 am 7F 2-8-0 wrote: as a group there will be more than 1 of you at an exhibition to help with lifting? Two usually! We will have to be careful about access to some shows - I wouldn't want to take it in this form to Brighton Modelworld for instance! Upstairs, and only one small service lift! __________________________________________ Comment posted by jim s-w on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:43 am 7F 2-8-0 wrote: It does make sense, as a group if you are building an exhibition layout why stick to the time honoured tradition of 4 foot boards due to weight, as a group there will be more than 1 of you at an exhibition to help with lifting? Shaun Exactly. When you fill a van with layout there is always wasted load space at the top. Longer boards means more efficient storage. Cheers Jim __________________________________________ Comment posted by number6 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:50 am 10800 wrote: There will not be a Mk3! I'm very impressed by your devotion to the rebuild and replace cause. I think I may have been tempted to try another subject but I can see the appeal of Eridge. Raphael __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:54 am The most work will of course be the trackwork. Other than that, we have most of the buildings, canopies etc done, and a lot of trees (not nearly enough yet!). Scenic ground cover doesn't take long, and we hadn't really started on the fine infrastructure detail anyway, so there's not as much lost as you might imagine. __________________________________________ Comment posted by EM in Chelmsford on Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:00 pm <Drool> <Dribble> Keep going! __________________________________________ Comment posted by 7F 2-8-0 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:15 pm drool? well the original Eridge has given me some ideas on what I want to achieve anyway. Shaun __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:02 am A couple of hours with plane and spokeshave last night in Simon's garage before we retired to the convivial surroundings of the Bell in Smarden for some of Shepherd Neame's finest . The boards will probably be moved to the clubroom this weekend for setting up together on the supports - I'll try and call in and take some photos next time I'm up there (Tonbridge show weekend). Meanwhile I called in at the real Eridge briefly this morning (viewtopic.php?f=7&t=17286) mainly to take some initial photos of the additional buildings we will need to do. The stationmaster's house (without the upper level pebbledash, back to some proper LBSCR decorative brickwork!): Some more cottages just over the river from the goods yard: And last but not least the Huntsman pub: __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:33 pm The mortal remains of Eridge Mk1. The old boards ended their days in the firebox of a Burrell traction engine before their ashes were blown out of the chimney - a fitting end somehow, certainly better than being thrown on the tip. Thursday night we completed the support frames (which will also carry the lighting pelmets eventually) and here is one of the three main new boards in rough position. The means of connecting the support frames to each other for rigid support is still provisional and the subject of ongoing discussion. __________________________________________ Comment posted by nevardmedia on Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:30 pm I was in a lucky position to see this bench work yesterday whilst on a secret mission down the Cobdown clubrooms. This is one serious project and highly innovative. I can't believe that there are many layouts that are being given such a new lease of life with such a major rebuild! Local club? Top stuff __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:05 am Sorry to have missed you Chris, although I don't get there very often nowadays (a bit far from Devon) - how did you come to be passing? I hope whoever was there looked after you OK! __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:29 am My Kentish colleagues have been very busy and advanced the board construction to a point where trackbed preparation and tracklaying can commence. I will hopefully be up there next week and can take some more photos. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:51 pm Looking very encouraging, Rod, top class joinery there on the part of you and your colleagues! Are you going to be constructing the houses and pub in the earlier photos yourself? __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:18 pm Captain Kernow wrote: Looking very encouraging, Rod, top class joinery there on the part of you and your colleagues! Are you going to be constructing the houses and pub in the earlier photos yourself? Ta CK, mostly colleagues to be fair! We'll probably divvy up the buildings so that we do one each - need to do another field trip to do some more detailed photos and some measuring, maybe even some drinking in one of them __________________________________________ Comment posted by pinkmouse on Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:55 pm As the newbie in the KAG, I have to say the boards so far are excellent. You can pick up the thin ones and carry them quite easily with one hand. However now they have me to cope with, progress will probably slow right down. __________________________________________
-
Eridge (P4) rebuilding by 10800 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat May 19, 2007 1:37 pm As mentioned on the 'Eridge revisited' thread viewtopic.php?t=394" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and at the end of the 'Heckmondwike' thread viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2858" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; we have decided to rebuild Eridge because of unacceptable baseboard deterioration and consequent negative impact on running and general reliability. The rebuild will involve scrapping all the track and scenery, but retaining the buildings, platforms etc. Full-width baseboards (3'6" wide and up to 4'3" long) will be replaced by a system of 'solid' boards just covering the trackbed width with lightweight scenery modules plugging in from the sides, the whole lot being supported on an independent framework. The whole design is in fairly fluid brainstorming mode at the moment, and I'll put up some sketches later for comment. The biggest board may well be about 7ft long (but only 1ft wide at one end and about 3ft at the other). This isn't a problem in length terms because we would still have to hire a van for transport in any case, but has the big advantage of getting all the turnouts except three onto a single board. The length of this board can be seen from the photos below, extending from the far crossover to just this side of the platform ends. The only turnouts on the layout that would not be on this board are the three nearest the camera on the first photo. It may also be desirable/possible to split the trackbed sections lengthwise into two across the station and goods yard, so that the loops on the right and the siding extreme right are separated from the tracks to the left, with the right-hand platform sitting across the gap between them - otherwise we end up with boards as wide as they are now. We also want to be able to shunt the yard properly, so we're thinking of moving the operator side from the left where it is now to the right. Turnout operation will by necessity have to change from tube-in-wire to electric, and signals (not finished yet anyway ) will also be electrically operated. The layout is currently DC/cab control operated, and we see no reason to change from that for the rebuild. The rebuild will also allow for features such as point rodding runs and signal mounts to be designed in from the outset. Hopefully the outcome will be an Eridge that looks much the same but is more robust and future-proofed to give it a decent exhibiting lifespan. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat May 19, 2007 6:33 pm Some sketches of what in conceptual form might be involved. The 'trackbed boards' would be in the form of an inverted U-channel in section, depth to be decided but certainly enough to accommodate Tortoise motors, signal mechs, and sub-track scenics (there is a stream going under the tracks on the section shown). The support framework will obviously be a bit more than a collection of wooden goalposts but you get the general idea. Scenic modules would be supported by the same framework but just plug in from the side or sit between boards 4/5 and 5/6. This is a possible configuration of the boards. The siding (4) has been included as a separate board because otherwise the maximum width of (3) and (5) would be too much. Any comments even at this outline design stage would be welcome. __________________________________________ Comment posted by MooUK on Sat May 19, 2007 6:37 pm Interesting concept for those separate scenery boards. Should make moving it etc and replacing sections of damaged scenery (if such ever happened) a lot easier, I'd expect. The whole sectional thing appeals to me, especially since that general idea is what I'm intending to use (at a smaller scale, likely). __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat May 19, 2007 6:47 pm Looking at it again there are probably good reasons for keeping 5/6 together as a single board as long as it's not too unwieldy. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Re6/6 on Sun May 20, 2007 5:50 am Wow Rod Richter 7 situation there Excellent proposals but can you not save the superb looking trackwork by careful removal . It would be such a shame to loose all that work Perhaps since you are scrapping the baseboards could you not soak the whole lot in water (if PVA was used to secure track) Very inovative method with the scenery, nay revolutionary Have these nagging doubts about the MDF (unsealed) baseboard tops, they all seem to suffer from 'ajoining end lift' on Matford. problem all seems to stem from living above that b***** creek, all that salt moisture getting into everything. As you know I have the layout semi-permanently erected in my dining room, prior to Exeter show & depending on the moisture & temperature the performance (excluding known faults) is highly variable, in damp periods the 'end lift' problem seems to rear its ugly head, then it seems to settle down Hence my paranoia about DRAG's test track mk2 being thoroughly sealed from the outset with either 'Danboline' bilge paint which is very tough & knock resistant, it has to protect in an extreme environment in the bilges of a boat with salt water, diesel & lubricating oils swilling around or 2-pack epoxy yacht primer (or similar). I had never thought of 'future proofing' except for T/T mk2 which will have to take a lot of abuse being assembled & taken to bits far more than your average layout. Just received my new Vitrains cl37 in EWS maroon. Well I'm very pleased with it it looks fairly straightforward to convert to P4 (famous last words ) . Well it looks like a 37 to me, not a Black 5, so it must be one ---------that's another thread I think. __________________________________________ Comment posted by cornelius on Sun May 20, 2007 7:26 am Definitely a very interesting concept. I suppose in theory* you could even have alternate plug-in boards to modify the scenery for different eras. * Duplicated amount of work and hassle notwithstanding. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun May 20, 2007 10:28 am I don't think there's anything particularly new about lightweight plug-in scenery - Vincent de Bode did it on 'Flintfield' and wrote it up in MRJ or Scalefour News (can check out the refs if anyone's interested), and I think 'Lee-on-Solent' is another one. There are some minor mods to the trackplan we want to bring in John, so the (nice) idea of soaking it all off would not help much anyway. On the current version some turnouts had to be moved because of the positions of the baseboard joints, these can now be put where they should be. In particular I was never happy with the alignment of the up loop rejoining the main road (centre foreground of second photo above). You could have alternative scenery boards Cornelius, although it wouldn't do much for us because they're not 'era-specific'. You would have to change all the buildings as well (and the stock of course!). There is a layout in Scotland however that has alternative drop in scenery modules for doing different seasons - springtime, snow cover and so on. __________________________________________ Comment posted by John B on Sun May 20, 2007 3:52 pm 10800 wrote: I don't think there's anything particularly new about lightweight plug-in scenery - Vincent de Bode did it on 'Flintfield' and wrote it up in MRJ or Scalefour News (can check out the refs if anyone's interested), and I think 'Lee-on-Solent' is another one. [snipped] Lee on the Solent, as Rod says, uses the same system of a trackwork spine with lightweight plug-in scenery. When we were given the original layout by Colin Hayward (he built it in the 1970s) it ran like a dog, and there wasnt much scenery past the trackbed. The buildings were lovely, though, and they remain. The rest of the layout, trackwork and all, was scrapped, and a new start made. The track "spine" is an inverted U-channel made out of MDF, sealed with varnish to prevent damp expansion. It's solid, deep enough to house tortoises, and can be set up in isolation of the whole layout for testing / playing purposes. (None of us had a room large enough to erect the whole layout, apart from the clubrooms.) Track was hand-laid - ply and rivet, a mix of bullhead and flat-bottom to replicate the extremely light construction of the prototype (code 40 FB rail used on the "loop"). The "spine" sits on a framework which flat-packs for transport. (This is the part of the layout that while setting up and knocking down at exhibitions draws most commnt from fellow exhibitors, amazed we can get a 18ft x 3ft layout, plus lighting rig, into two small cars..) The framework / legs are no more than pieces of jig-cut birch plywood, 6mm thick, all lettered / numbered and sealed, which ###### together with captive nuts and bolts like a giant meccano set. Powered screwdrivers are de-riguer for the operating crew... This setup gives us a very stable base for the narrow spine, and support for the lightweight scenery modules which plug into the spine on either side. It was so successful that a similar system is being used for the (eventual) successor, "Cosham", another local South Hants prototype, a big mainline roundy this time though instead of a bucolic light railway branchline terminus... __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pudley Wonderer on Sun May 20, 2007 4:25 pm Steering away from the current subject matter a bit for a mo, I see in the new edition of the Toddler that the next issues gonna feature Eridge, by Vivien Thompson!! Could this be the same Vivien that built Eastbourne all them years ago Puds __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun May 20, 2007 4:42 pm It would be a bit of a coincidence if it wasn't the same one! Glad to see she's still around I look forward to those with considerable interest! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Tue May 22, 2007 1:01 pm Whatever else happens, I wish you the very best of luck, Rod and the rest of KAG with what must be a daunting prospect, from the point of view of having to virtually rebuild most of the layout from scratch. You Men of Kent (or are you Kentish Men? ) must be made of stern stuff! __________________________________________ Comment posted by MartinWales on Tue May 22, 2007 2:57 pm Captain Kernow wrote: You Men of Kent (or are you Kentish Men? ) must be made of stern stuff! Depends if they're north or south of the Medway! __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun May 27, 2007 4:22 pm Captain Kernow wrote: Whatever else happens, I wish you the very best of luck, Rod and the rest of KAG with what must be a daunting prospect, from the point of view of having to virtually rebuild most of the layout from scratch. You Men of Kent (or are you Kentish Men? ) must be made of stern stuff! Strangely enough we don't see it as 'daunting', just an exercise in improving our skills, developing new techniques and getting the layout into a condition where we can really enjoy it rather than fight with it. Of the four main KAG members, only one is a 'Man of Kent' (east of the Medway) as far as I know - one is a 'Kentish Man', one is from Norfolk and I'm a sarf lunnoner originally (south side of Westminster Bridge next to what was County Hall). Ta for the good wishes in any case! __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:45 pm One of the issues with the rebuild is integrating the fixed infrastructure we have now with the updated track configuration that we have the opportunity to do. By this I mean that the alignments of the main roads through the platforms are defined by the platforms, which ain't gonna change, and all this (and the pointwork) was done B.T. (Before Templot). I'm now doing the layout beyond the platform ends with Templot, using the 6-inch OS and 1:480 plan that we have (courtesy of Alan 'Cuckoo Line' Elliot), but the platform roads will of course have to be exactly as they are now. So this section of the existing trackwork has been 'brass-rubbed' onto paper - one of the advantages of having a clubroom associated with the former Reeds Paper Mills is that we have a huge roll of 3ft wide paper which is ideal for this. This was then sent to me in Devon and I nervously plotted out the Templot bit adjoining it, but lo and behold they matched almost perfectly so a short session finetuning one or two of the track joins next time I'm up in Kent should sort that. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:55 pm Just picked up a copy of the new RM with Vivien Thompson's 'Eridge' on the cover and featured inside. Some of the buildings are very nice as you'd expect (apart from the grossly oversize canopy support columns) but overall I was disappointed. The scenery in particular is very dated looking, and the whole thing is too bright - somehow I was expecting more, especially remembering her architectural models of Eastbourne etc from the late 60s and early 70s. Still, she's finished her Eridge which is more than we can say! __________________________________________ Comment posted by sunshine coast on Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:19 pm Rod , I know what you mean about Vivien's layout ,I have a copy of April 1971 RM featuring her Eastbourne layout and the modelling looks identical especially the scenery,apart from being in black and white,almost as though time had stood still .......most odd ? Regards Trevor.... __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pudley Wonderer on Fri Jun 22, 2007 9:14 am See Rod, I might be a bit NUTS , but I told you it was gonna feature in the next issue of Toddler Have to say, you dont actually hear much of the lady in question hese days, a bit like you dont hear much of Shirley Rowe, and they bith were rather highly regarded modellers then Spooky also how only the other day I picked up a copy of Viviens book for Trev Puds __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:33 pm Before designing and building new baseboards, first task is to (re)confirm the track plan. We are very fortunate in having an official 1:480 scale plan for Eridge covering more than the whole of the layout as modelled, so what's the problem you say? Well, it dates from 1979 by which time all the goods yard had disappeared and the down loop had been truncated, much the same condition it is now, and our model based in the 1950s includes the goods yard. The best basis for the track plan including the goods yard is this 6":1 mile OS map from 1950 (so now out of copyright) which, although it is not fully accurate is pretty good, and we would have happily used this in the absence of the 1:480 BR plan. The track plan for the first version of Eridge was done by scaling up the 1:480 plan to 1:76.2 and using that as a template. The goods yard was scaled in from the OS map as best we could, and the lines through the platforms were defined in detail by the platform dimensions which we measured for real in the field. Some of the pointwork was also moved to avoid the baseboard joints we had at the time. At this stage we didn't have Templot, although Templot was used for the last two boards away from the station to the 3-arch bridge, which were done later. This time, in order to avoid manual transfer, I wanted to do the whole layout on Templot, and a first pass was done by building the trackwork onto the 1:480 plan, having scanned and imported it into the programme. This is a section of the result, plotted at full size but with rails only for clarity at this stage, and stitched together (I only have an A4 printer at home). The crinkles are just a function of the glue and registration process (my errors, not Templot's). However, the defining markers from Eridge Mk1 are the platforms, and so the new Templot version, as well as enabling some pointwork to be moved to more authentic alignments, will have to be jiggled a bit to make sure the platform roads are spot on. The best way to check that was to do a 'brass rubbing' of the current trackwork in the station throat area to compare with the Templot version: Not too bad, but a bit of work required in places. Rather than trial-and-error, I will probably scan the brass rubbing in and adjust the track over the Mk1 alignments on computer screen. As far as baseboards are concerned, we are pondering with the idea of having just three solid trackbed boards of 8ft length each, which will cover the whole scenic section of 24ft. This stems from the concept of having a middle board on which nearly all the important P&C work was situated. These will be kept as narrow as possible with scenery on lightweight sections plugged in from the sides as per the sketches at the beginning of the thread. We are also pondering widening the scenery by up to a foot either side of the trackbed (limited by the reach required for uncoupling and coupling when shunting the yard from the front of the layout) to make it look even more like a landscape with a railway set in it. Progress will inevitably be slow, but I'll update as we go. __________________________________________ Comment posted by sunshine coast on Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:13 pm Looks like you have got yourselves a lot of work there Rod,,but it will be interesting to follow,when your team gets to the scenic parts please give me a shout I may be able to help out. Regards Trevor.. __________________________________________ Comment posted by number6 on Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:14 pm This is going to put that P4 Lewes on the back burner then?! I had my first ever ride up from Uckfield the other day. Amazing really seeing as I've lived nearby pretty much all my life. It is easy to forget this line was heavily engineered and not really the bucolic branchline it is today. The tunnels and bridges give it away - all fairly heavily engineered and when you reach Ashurst the junctions to Tunbridge and East Grinstead and Three Bridges give a real sense of this network of lines that is now all missing. If the line was still intact I got the sense I would always chose to travel up this way to London if I had the time! Eridge is very over-grown these days - I'd visited here a few times when the Groombridge line was open and when climbing at Harrisons Rocks nearby. Nice to see all the buildings and canopies intact. How did that happen as everywhere else is bus shelters? The killer reason for closure of the Uckfield line was given to be the weak bridges over the old goods yard in Lewes. I've never worked out why this couldn't have been infilled as an embankment as there was no reason for the bridge at this point anymore. The real reason for closure was actually being the internal ringroad built in 1968 crossing at right angles and at the same height as the line... Best of luck and look forward to seeing that module approach develop. regards Raphael __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:19 pm sunshine coast wrote: Looks like you have got yourselves a lot of work there Rod,,but it will be interesting to follow,when your team gets to the scenic parts please give me a shout I may be able to help out. Cheers Trevor, I must drop into your shop one day for a natter __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:25 pm number6 wrote: This is going to put that P4 Lewes on the back burner then?! Just a little! I'm not sure if the group will want to do it realistically. At the moment if we ever do something beyond Eridge it might be London urban based around Factory Junction and Wandsworth Road. I still might do just the main junction at the eastern end of Lewes platforms for myself as a masochistic exercise in trackbuilding! Eridge is very over-grown these days - I'd visited here a few times when the Groombridge line was open and when climbing at Harrisons Rocks nearby. Nice to see all the buildings and canopies intact. How did that happen as everywhere else is bus shelters? I've a feeling the buildings have a listed status? Best of luck and look forward to seeing that module approach develop. Thanks Raphael Might even have to organise a SAG visit one day! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pudley Wonderer on Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:14 am sunshine coast wrote: Looks like you have got yourselves a lot of work there Rod,,but it will be interesting to follow,when your team gets to the scenic parts please give me a shout I may be able to help out. Regards Trevor.. I'll second that favour Puds __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:01 am There have been some developments and the rebuild is gathering pace. The middle (longest) trackbed board has been constructed to test the methodology of all-glued construction using 6 mm ply and MDF top. I've seen some photos of it and it looks impressive - especially given that it's about 12 inches (whaaaattt! ) deep - I'm not sure why that was done, other than Mike saying "this one ain't gonna sag", and apparently it doesn't make much difference to the handleability. At that size we could store all the stock and other stuff inside it during transport! There will be some weekend sessions coming up to build the rest of the boards before starting on trackwork. I'll post pictures as soon as I get electronic copies of them or take some myself. The Templot version of the whole layout has been adopted (with possible some minor tweaks to come) since it won't affect the buildings and canopies already constructed, and the platforms themselves can be adjusted or at worst done from new if necessary. A rails-only version has been exported to DXF and printed out full-size and in one piece on a roll-plotter so that board construction can continue knowing where all the point motors, signals etc are going to be. Another decision made without any further prompting from me is to go DCC on the rebuild, which suits me fine as it will much improve compatibility with Camberhurst. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:06 pm Dismantling of Mk1 has now commenced, with switches, magnets and salvageable wiring being recovered last night from underneath. No turning back now! __________________________________________
-
00 roundy-roundy - Tawbridge by 10800 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ Comment posted by beast66606 on Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:17 pm Captain Kernow wrote: beast66606 wrote: In signalling one can never say never just say unlikely - not sure Andrew does a range of RTP signals ... I think it would have been worked, Rod. A fixed distant would normally be provided in situations where the stop signals ahead of it would never have all been cleared throughout for a non-stop train As this thread has been resurrected I have only just noticed this Fixed distants were provided when the speed limit was 40mph or less (in theory) - although some goods line had working distants with far lower limits. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:37 am Thanks for the clarification Dave - all this probably means there won't be one __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:08 pm Just for a bit of fun (and some checking) I dug out some of the proposed stock for Tawbridge to put on the draft Templot covering the curved fiddle yard entry at one end. Apart from getting a feel for scale it was also a useful exercise in seeing how tight the curves could be off-scene without compromising vehicle separation on the straights too much (and the coupling extension devices used by Bachmann and Hornby on their coaches are helpful here). At the moment the ruling radius is 30 inches but I reckon I could come down to 27 without causing too many problems. __________________________________________ Comment posted by westrerner on Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:48 pm Its good to see its beginning to lift of the planning stage. __________________________________________ Comment posted by The Stationmaster on Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:15 pm Captain Kernow wrote: beast66606 wrote: In signalling one can never say never just say unlikely - not sure Andrew does a range of RTP signals ... I think it would have been worked, Rod. A fixed distant would normally be provided in situations where the stop signals ahead of it would never have all been cleared throughout for a non-stop train. You can only clear the distant signal if all stop signals in the line of travel at that particular block post have already been cleared. It signifies a clear run ahead to the driver. If you are modelling a double track main line or secondary route to the north of Dartmoor, I think it's highly unlikely that they would have provided a fixed distant. And yes, I did mean a flat accommodation crossing! When we use the term 'crossing' at work, we invariably mean a level crossing (although 'accommodation' and 'occupation' crossings are normally referred to as 'user worked crossings' these days). If you don't want a farm type crossing with gates etc. (Ratio do the bits, mind!), how about a nice footpath crossing with kissing gates?! From what of that line I knew and can otherwise recall I don't think there were any fixed distants and a quick check confirms that there were no fixed distants on the mainline between Cowley Bridge Jcn and Devonport (nor were there any colour light distants - I think the most westerly colour lights on the LSWR mainline prior to singling were either Crewkerne (after the new 'box opened) or possibly a distant signal in the vicinity of Honiton Tunnel. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:30 am westrerner wrote: Its good to see its beginning to lift of the planning stage. Spaceboard purchased last week, now into the details of board design and configurations - trip to the timber merchants for ply and 'no more nails' soon, then firing up the bandsaw in the garage. __________________________________________ Comment posted by number6 on Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:50 am Exciting stuff! Can't wait. You can make all the mistakes and I'll learn! cheers Raphael __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:53 am number6 wrote: Exciting stuff! Can't wait. You can make all the mistakes and I'll learn! cheers Raphael As was said no doubt by most first generation industrialists outside the UK ... The main design issues are having the foamboard for the two main scenic boards at the front dropped by 100mm or so to allow for the river crossing and associated scenery, with the trackbed carried across these on ply supports. Board ends probably of 9mm ply to accommodate the dowels, with 6mm for the sides and trackbed. Ply surrounds will be deeper than the foamboard for wiring and to allow for the scenic drops. At the moment I am looking at just one long loop at the back for each of the two lines. One road in each direction will accommodate ply cassettes (two per track) so that shorter trains or sections of trains can be lifted in and out. Not really enough room for lots of sidings and pointwork. Cassettes will be up to 1 m long with 9mm bases and 6mm ply sides glued so that the ply directions are in opposition for rigidity. The back boards will therefore have to drop a few mm with respect to the 'running boards'. I'll try and put some sketches up when I know exactly what I am planning. __________________________________________ Comment posted by westrerner on Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:05 pm The loop and cassette idea seems very much an Ian Rice idea. Was hoping to do it on wencombe but settled for 5 loops. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:21 pm westrerner wrote: The loop and cassette idea seems very much an Ian Rice idea. Might have been - not much in this game that's really new. I'm just thinking through what I need to do for my own purposes. __________________________________________
-
00 roundy-roundy - Tawbridge by 10800 original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:25 pm It's a nice idea Alan, but doesn't feature in the plans at the moment __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:12 pm But Rod....... just think how nice it would be to have a cute little signalbox and a couple of working signals.... (interchangeable, to suit different company styles, of course).... __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:13 pm Captain Kernow wrote: But Rod....... just think how nice it would be to have a cute little signalbox and a couple of working signals.... (interchangeable, to suit different company styles, of course).... Get thee behind me, Satan! __________________________________________ Comment posted by John B on Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:13 pm 10800 wrote: Captain Kernow wrote: But Rod....... just think how nice it would be to have a cute little signalbox and a couple of working signals.... (interchangeable, to suit different company styles, of course).... Get thee behind me, Satan! And a cute little crossover and branch line junction to give reason for said box and signals __________________________________________ Comment posted by philip-griffiths on Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:20 pm Rod, The Ulster MRC built a layout with a similar philosophy, just for exhibiting, a few years ago, but then added some refuge loops. http://www.freewebs....exhibition2.htm It was built on doors as these were found to be very robust and didn't warp. Very successful. It replaced a similar layout which was yonks old, constructed in a similar fashion and called the 'Doors' layout! very original. regards Philip __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:27 pm Some interesting parallels there Philip, but a bit more complex than what I have in mind! Still, goes to show how few genuinely orginal concepts there are around. __________________________________________ Comment posted by philip-griffiths on Wed Mar 19, 2008 10:11 pm Rod, I've been planning and re-planning something similar with my botched 1883 entry - i.e. a roundy layout, but in P4. (Yeah, I've lost the "New Poster" label!) regards Philip __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:11 pm philip-griffiths wrote: ... but in P4. OK, make me feel guilty why don't you! __________________________________________ Comment posted by philip-griffiths on Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:13 pm Well it wasn't supposed to make you feel that way Rod. I should feel guilty in that I still am expressing my 1883 layout in the future tense. The baseboards are built and some of the trusses are constructed. I'm still trying to finalise the pillars, when I get them sorted I can build them, finalise the trusses and put it all together. I really would like to finish this. Though it has moved on a bit and the idea is to match a Crumlin type viaduct structure with a Bargoed setting. regards Philip __________________________________________ Comment posted by number6 on Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:33 pm Rod Are you sure about only having an 8ft scenic section? Seems a bit small for all that effort in construction and space. If you had one long gentle curve across the front you could push those scenic breaks out further. Trains always seem to run smoother on curves... or certainly you'd not be bringing attention to the curve to straight transition. I also wonder if you can't squash down those fiddleyard loops - if you are going to be using RTR its all very capable of going through less smooth pointwork and the big curved points could go? Maybe you've been in P4-land too long?! I'm not adverse to a the addition of a cute little diary, quarry exchange sidings and etc. off the country junction either. best Raphael __________________________________________ Comment posted by jongwinnett on Sat Mar 22, 2008 8:37 pm Rod, Not wanting to add to your dilemma/waverings etc, but have you seen the latest shots on nevardmedia's Catcott thread? If anyone ever wondered if 00 could look "the business" then this surely answers them! http://www.rmweb.co....=312155#p312155 Having a serious rethink about not-rewheeling my M7s etc. as I type this! __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Mar 22, 2008 8:59 pm number6 wrote: Rod Are you sure about only having an 8ft scenic section? Seems a bit small for all that effort in construction and space. If you had one long gentle curve across the front you could push those scenic breaks out further. Trains always seem to run smoother on curves... or certainly you'd not be bringing attention to the curve to straight transition. I also wonder if you can't squash down those fiddleyard loops - if you are going to be using RTR its all very capable of going through less smooth pointwork and the big curved points could go? Maybe you've been in P4-land too long?! Hi Raphael Well, I'm open to ideas on minimum radius in the non-scenic section which might enable the scenic section to be stretched a bit, but it would be quite a feat to bring it down to the layout frontage less a foot and a half at each end wouldn't it, giving nine feet or so? I'll have a play though - thanks for your interest! (Inevitably I am influenced by P4-land, which is still my real home!). __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:00 pm jongwinnett wrote: Not wanting to add to your dilemma/waverings etc, but have you seen the latest shots on nevardmedia's Catcott thread? Mmmmmmm ... __________________________________________ Comment posted by Captain Kernow on Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:24 pm 10800 wrote: jongwinnett wrote: Not wanting to add to your dilemma/waverings etc, but have you seen the latest shots on nevardmedia's Catcott thread? Mmmmmmm ... You know you want it..... __________________________________________ Comment posted by number6 on Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:36 pm 10800 wrote: Well, I'm open to ideas on minimum radius in the non-scenic section which might enable the scenic section to be stretched a bit, but it would be quite a feat to bring it down to the layout frontage less a foot and a half at each end wouldn't it, giving nine feet or so? If you are adverse to the idea of a tighter curve out in the scenic section then you are stuffed but there must be a way with a more egg-shaped plan to have the trains coming out of the tightest part of the curve into the scene. And you could definitely get down to 2.5ft curves with no problems. That withered arm had a few kinks in it didn't it? Raphael __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Mar 23, 2008 12:59 am Captain Kernow wrote: 10800 wrote: jongwinnett wrote: Not wanting to add to your dilemma/waverings etc, but have you seen the latest shots on nevardmedia's Catcott thread? Mmmmmmm ... You know you want it..... Badgering me in two threads at once isn't going to work you know - I'm made of sterner stuff! __________________________________________ Comment posted by SweeneyTodd on Sun Mar 23, 2008 1:35 am Hello Rod , Quote "roundy-roundy layout in 00" if you have the space it makes much more sence than a " parallel-parallel in OO" in my opinion The bench for beer time / pencil an paper time / fiddle yard time / looks great / model building / laptop time / whatever / is a fantasic idea ..... The no station no signals idea is super ... The fact that you will be able to run any loco pulling any wagon or coach on your layout is wonderfull , and be able to just watch them run around , with sound or not , and no theme , is as far as i'm concerned a utterly and brilliant idea and "theme" in its self .... Shaun __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:53 am Thanks Shaun - it won't be permanently erected unfortunately (not in the current house anyway) so will remain as an occasional bit of playtime and/or exhibition material, and also a learning programme for Camberhurst and Eridge Mk2 scenically. I may change the line of the curve at the front (following comments by Raphael and Alan Smithee), bringing it closer to the front edge, but possibly allowing for additional plug in scenic bits on the front to increase the depth. I'm also thinking about ways to disguise the river as it heads off the back. Might put up a revised plan later on. __________________________________________ Comment posted by beast66606 on Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:24 am it will be DC From the decoder to the motor only I hope __________________________________________ ??? posted on Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:46 am beast66606 wrote: it will be DC From the decoder to the motor only I hope No final decision yet on that one Dave! Initially this one will probably be DC throughout, but who knows later on! __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:14 pm I've had a further play with Templot and the frontage curvature and have decided to leave it as it is - whilst you can extend the scenic section a little and have a long curve, the radius of that curve is still about 5ft and less than what I would want. As is my wont, I've put together a 1/10th scale mockup of the layout with backboard (18in high) and proscenium arch. The arch is supported in the middle by a gantry extending from the rear (to avoid an obstruction half way along the front). Light-weight lighting (possibly halogen tracks) can be suspended between the outer arch supports and the middle gantry. It will obviously be a lot higher off the ground than the 1ft suggested by this I was out yesterday looking for possible scenic views that I can photograph, print and stitch together for the backdrop - some possibilities off the A30 between Crediton and Okehampton, but the weather was not very good! When I eventually get them, the photos could if necessary be adjusted for blueness to enhance the distance effect. __________________________________________ Comment posted by martin_wynne on Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:58 pm Hi Rod, I've just discovered this topic. Nice one. For a P4 modeller thinking of dabbling in 00, have you made any decisions about the track standard to use? Exactoscale are known to be working on something for 00: http://groups.yahoo....-SF/message/298 I don't know what standard Len has settled on, but 00-SF gives you the best pointwork appearance and running quality with no need to modify RTR wheels and interchangeability with Peco turnouts on the same layout, e.g. in a fiddle yard. Brian Tulley has just sourced some superb track gauge tools for 00-SF, although you may have missed the first batch. My guide to the available track standards for 00 is at: http://groups.yahoo....-SF/message/254 regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by <B> Re: Proposed 00 Withered Arm (or anywhere) roundy-roundy on Mon Mar 24, 2008 3:37 pm Just a note of caution, C&L in OO does have a slight drawback, the rail fixings are just too high for some Bachmann items* whereas SMP rail fixings on their plain track are just that touch lower and much cheaper . Tim *surely Rod doesn't want to rewheel his stock otherwise it rather defeats the purpose of a simple OO layout? __________________________________________ Comment posted by martin_wynne on Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:10 pm Alan Smithee wrote: C&L in OO does have a slight drawback, the rail fixings are just too high for some Bachmann items A solution to this is to file a soldering iron bit to the shape of the wheel profile, and run it along the top of the rail. This will melt just enough plastic off the top of the chair jaws to clear the wheels. Surprisingly, after painting this is barely noticeable -- visitors who have seen this EM railway have never noticed it: regards, Martin. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:58 pm The pointwork in the fiddle yard (all six of them) will be Peco code 75. Plain line in the fiddle yard will probably also be Peco code 75. For the scenic section, I am aware of the C&L/Bachmann wheel issue, and may try either SMP or more likely Exactoscale fast-track bases (should be an interesting conversation with Andrew when I buy them off his stand!). As Tim points out, the whole basis of this is convenience and playing trains straight out of the box. __________________________________________ </B>
-
West Mersea - progress to July 2009
Buckjumper posted a blog entry in The West Mersea Branch - Essex, June 1946.
The West Mersea Branch - 1946 Essex in ScaleSeven by buckjumper original page on Old RMweb __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Nov 03, 2008 2:59 pm Good to see I've drawn you out of the woodwork. I'd missed your earlier post until now - thanks to the link to your site, I'll keep an eye on it. Dave R wrote: Not sure if we could get away with one partly buried in the embankment allotments as the kit is only 1:48 scale; and the 830kg Amolite warhead caused a 600yd diameter blast zone in Lewisham which would wipe out most of the West Mersea station area! Perhaps we should exact that kind of damage on West Mersea - the track could then be relaid after running the plan through Templot.... __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pint of Adnams on Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:30 pm OgaugeJB wrote: Is Pint of Adnams on the regulars list yet ? JB. Hi Jonathan, As you can see the internet broadband pipe is now up and (mainly) running, and I'm getting back into the swing of things. I hope to make the November monthly meeting, all things being equal. BTW On reading your thread, I'm dismayed to note that you haven't built another 10 kits though - one for each week I've been in limbo . __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:34 pm Sorry to have let you down there pint, but I've had to do some real work for a bit. I'm trying to progress as far as possible with the K2 before the next meeting. It's going to start getting tricky soon! JB. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dave R on Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:53 pm buckjumper wrote: Dave R wrote: Not sure if we could get away with one partly buried in the embankment allotments as the kit is only 1:48 scale (not quite ScaleSeven); and the 830kg Amolite warhead caused a 600yd diameter blast zone in Lewisham which would wipe out most of the West Mersea station area! Perhaps we should exact that kind of damage on West Mersea - the track could then be relaid after running the plan through Templot.... But I've just spent 6 weeks drawing what's already there in preparation for the point rodding design... From my survey last September it was drawn in Templot; redrawn after October's meeting and seeing some of your photos above. The idea was to get the stretcher bar positions and enough track to indicate where the rodding runs could go; not to get a proper plan of the layout. Apart from the turnouts leading to the end loading docks on the West side I'm now fairly happy with the arrangement although there will be a few more measurements needed in November. Then a lever-numbering scheme had to be devised; this drawing was finished late last Sunday evening. Now all that's needed is to export the Templot plan into AutoCad and get the rodding runs positioned with equal push and pull; and then count up the bits required to give us a shopping list. My 3-lever ground frame on Lumpy Sidings took me 2 months to "rod up"; I'll leave it to the reader to calculate how long the 60 lever frame of West Mersea will take... If I can get some time at my PC at home tonight I'll get the files printed to a PDF and try to get it published here; but don't hold your collective breaths, SWMBO has got me lined up for a decorating project scheduled for completion before Xmas __________________________________________ Comment posted by martin_wynne on Tue Nov 04, 2008 5:09 pm Dave R wrote: Now all that's needed is to export the Templot plan into AutoCad and get the rodding runs positioned with equal push and pull Hi Dave, You could do the rodding directly in Templot using dummy "centre-line only" templates (geometry > track centre-lines only). This makes it much easier to create the rodding runs parallel to the tracks, especially if they are gently curved. You can still export to CAD to add the compensator and crank detail. regards, Martin. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dave R on Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:01 pm martin_wynne wrote: Dave R wrote: Now all that's needed is to export the Templot plan into AutoCad and get the rodding runs positioned with equal push and pull You could do the rodding directly in Templot using dummy "centre-line only" templates (geometry > track centre-lines only). This makes it much easier to create the rodding runs parallel to the tracks, especially if they are gently curved. You can still export to CAD to add the compensator and crank detail. And I might be tempted to go that way if Templot's dxf export exported curves as curves rather than thousands of very short straights. Now, if I've got this forum thingy sussed, there should be a PDF file attached: West Mersea Signal Diagram pdf Page 1 assumes that only passenger lines had facing point locks and that the GER were fairly mean with their ground signals (I am assuming that you've read the previous 100+ posts and have studied Ade's photos meticulously so that you know where everything is or, more to the point, isn't because it hasn't been built yet!). Page 2 is a tabular description of of page 1 and will be expanded with the "shopping list" as the rodding design progresses. Page 3 is my survey (blue diamonds with a central cross show measured positions of stretcher bars) overlaid with a Templot approximation of the track -- it's an approximation because for this task that's all that was needed. Note that the numbering on this page is still v3 whereas the previous 2 are v4 so you'll have to use the {curly numbers} to cross-refer. Any queries I'll try and answer at lunchtimes from work; I've now got the hall, stairs and landing to rub down and paint before the new carpet is delivered... __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:31 pm The plan looks so much simpler when it is on paper compared to seeing it in the flesh as it were.. Good work there Dave, that's one heel of a job you were delegated JB. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dave R on Thu Nov 06, 2008 2:08 pm OgaugeJB wrote: The plan looks so much simpler when it is on paper compared to seeing it in the flesh as it were. It all depends on your point of view (literally). Next time you're there duck-under to the far side of the layout and climb up onto the "plank and milk crate" working platform. The layout appears to be totally different from the increased height; the sort of view that a V1 might have had as it plummeted into the embankment? OgaugeJB wrote: Good work there Dave, that's one heel of a job you were delegated Peter doesn't delegate jobs; he volunteers people. So far (and I've only attended 6 meetings) I've been volunteered for (1) wagon building (he eventually wants 1500 of them to populate the full project; but only 150 in the short term); (2) point rodding design; and (3) producing casting patterns for crossing nose A chairs. I must learn how to say "no" to him; how do the rest of you manage? __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:12 pm I hide behind the sandwiches and cups of tea... Oh and pretend to be making loco kits too JB. _______________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:40 pm Dave R wrote: I must learn how to say "no" to him; how do the rest of you manage? Oh I waffle on about some obscure but mildly interesting nugget of information pertaining to GER practice then turn turn the conversation around to "Chuffs" which sends Pete off on one of his funny stories about Iain Rice when he worked in Pete's shop as a yoof. Thanks for the pdfs - very interesting. _____________________________________ Comment posted by Dave R on Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:09 pm buckjumper wrote: Dave R wrote: I must learn how to say "no" to him; how do the rest of you manage? Oh I waffle on about some obscure but mildly interesting nugget of information pertaining to GER practice.. But I don't even need to be in Sudbury to get volunteered! A letter was attached to the last newsletter asking if I could Templot WM goods yard, loco shed, carriage sidings, junction, East Mersea, and all the intermediate stations along the branch up to and including Marks Tey. So please waffle away on the intricacies and history of GER track design as I don't actually have much clue as to what they did. For example: - Did the GER use CCL and CCR chairs on their check rails? Photos seem to show a short sharp curve at the check rail ends which might have been achieved between adjacent chairs; but does anybody have some clear evidence one way or the other? - When did interlaced turnouts get phased out? Do we need to include a few somewhere in the project? - Likewise wider timbers at rail joints and larger joint chairs? - Rail lengths? Sleeper spacings? - Rail weights? Does Peter need to get some 85 lb/yd rail drawn, and plastic mouldings for 85lb chairs (probably worn 85 lb/yd rail for the sidings etc, or even lighter rail depending on the history of the line). - One Templot .box file for the whole project (9?? miles to Marks Tey; that's over 350 metres of model) or one file per station? Peter will, of course, want it overlaid on an aerial photograph which has been distorted onto a 3D contour map like what Time Team do... __________________________________________ ??? posted on Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:28 pm Dave R wrote: But I don't even need to be in Sudbury to get volunteered! A letter was attached to the last newsletter asking if I could Templot WM goods yard, loco shed, carriage sidings, junction, East Mersea, and all the intermediate stations along the branch up to and including Marks Tey. So please waffle away on the intricacies and history of GER track design as I don't actually have much clue as to what they did. For example: - Did the GER use CCL and CCR chairs on their check rails? Photos seem to show a short sharp curve at the check rail ends which might have been achieved between adjacent chairs; but does anybody have some clear evidence one way or the other? Dunno; I shall enquire. - When did interlaced turnouts get phased out? Do we need to include a few somewhere in the project? I don't know if the GE used them post-War, if so it would have been the LNER which phased them out during the 20s. I don't remember having seen any, even in remote Company sidings post-1930s. However, I wonder if, for example, the gasworks had paid the GE to relay it's private sidings in the early 1900s, interlaced turnouts could remain in situ in that location. I'll dig a little to see if the GE was up for that sort of thing. Likewise wider timbers at rail joints and larger joint chairs? Yes, 12" instead of 10" timbers and special joint chairs were employed. These next questions have lots of answers, period and place dependent. Branch lines appear to have received second-hand rail, chairs and sleepers, taken from the main lines in the District. Rail lengths? In 1946 you would find only 45' and 60' sections on the running lines - the rail would be up in the 90lbs series. 90, 93 and 95lbs according to records of rail recovered from branch lines. Sleeper spacings? I've only got the GER 30' panel sleeper spacings which you can use in some of the less frequented sidings such as those in green in your pdf above, or possibly the carriage/cattle/end dock sidings: 13", 22", 26", 29", 6x30", 29", 26", 22", 13" Peter ought to have the info for the LNER 45' and 60' panels. Rail weights? Does Peter need to get some 85 lb/yd rail drawn, and plastic mouldings for 85lb chairs (probably worn 85 lb/yd rail for the sidings etc, or even lighter rail depending on the history of the line) Just for context, the Buntingford branch (not in any way comparable to WM) was found to have examples of 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 89, 90, 92 and 93lb rail at close of play in 1965. I know it had also been laid with 30' 87lb rail sections at the turn of the century. It may have missed out on hand-me-downGE mainline 95lb rail due to the War, but some 95lb was laid in 1939. BTW the 89, 92 and 93lbs rail above was BS laid post-1950, so out of period. I've got a GE 2-bolt chair from 1879 here that keeps my workshop door open in summer. IIRC that's for 85lb rail... One Templot .box file for the whole project (9??????‚?? miles to Marks Tey; that's over 350 metres of model) or one file per station? Peter will, of course, want it overlaid on an aerial photograph which has been distorted onto a 3D contour map like what Time Team do... ...and printed off and pasted on the hoardings across the road in time for the christmas party __________________________________________ Comment posted by glo41f on Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:51 pm Hi Adrian I live not a million miles from Sudbury, though not a S7 type we do have some in our local O scal group. I am about to embark on my own large (ish) 7mm line and have taken great interest in what you are doing with Peter. I have a small layout called West Mersea too which is postulated on an extension from Colchester Hythe (renamed Barrack Street) via Hythe Quay, Rowhedge, Abberton over the Strood on a junction split to East and West Mersea. We have an Act of Parliament too! The layouts were seen at Guildex some years ago. I would love the chance to see progress so far. Would this be possible please? Regards Martin Long __________________________________________ Comment posted by Dave R on Thu Nov 20, 2008 2:00 pm buckjumper wrote: Dave R wrote: One Templot .box file for the whole project (9?? miles to Marks Tey; that's over 350 metres of model) or one file per station? Peter will, of course, want it overlaid on an aerial photograph which has been distorted onto a 3D contour map like what Time Team do... ...and printed off and pasted on the hoardings across the road in time for the christmas party But not this year as I'm still on decorating duties until the carpet gets installed on 6th December which only leaves me a week or so thereafter during which I'm planning to sort out a rodding run or two. The weekend after next's meeting will have to do with prints of the PDFs which were attached above. As for the track; the required approach seems to be to write a history for each and every siding, turnout, length of rail, fishplate bolt etc (but only up until 1946, so it shouldn't be too onerous a task for you Ade ) so that the correct info can be entered into the Templot file for subsequent manufacture by John and Colin. I have investigated the "Time Team" virtual model idea previously. But as the highest points on Mersea Island are only 21m above sea level there aren't very many 10m contour lines available to describe the 3D shape. Even adding in the spot heights marked on the OS map doesn't help much. Anybody know a surveyor with a GPS system who fancies spending an afternoon walking around West Mersea for us? __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:33 pm Hi Martin glo41f wrote: I would love the chance to see progress so far. Would this be possible please? Peter would be delighted to see you. Shall contact you off forum. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:41 pm Dave R wrote: As for the track; the required approach seems to be to write a history for each and every siding, turnout, length of rail, fishplate bolt etc (but only up until 1946, so it shouldn't be too onerous a task for you Ade ) Arf, arf! That's the Christmas Party taken up then. __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Mon Jan 26, 2009 1:15 am A few videos were taken from today's meeting of Peter's J69, Colin's J68, and my newly built K2. A very enjoyable day had by all I think, except I think I ate far too many sausages.. http://uk.youtube.co...stMerseaRailway Regards, JB. __________________________________________ ??? posted on Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:54 pm Sausages - ah - I missed those. Had half a cup of coffee and a scone though The K2/2 performed beautifully - I think everyone was quite rightly impressed __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:01 pm Cheers Adrian...! You never know, I might have 3 painted engines by next month... what are the chances eh ?? JB. __________________________________________ Comment posted by OgaugeJB on Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:34 pm Hello all, just thought I would update this thread a little as it hasn't had any postings for a while.. I popped down to WMHQ for one of the mid-month wednesday meets yesterday which turned out to be quite a good day. One of the other members was there doing a little work on the Pway, and my engines were used to check running through some of the turnouts, and the single slip which has apparently caused a few tears in the past, but now seems to be working pretty much perfectly... which is nice.. Whilst I was there Peter Hunt mentioned his woes of lacking a brake van for the goods workings, so I bought the slaters 20T LNER brake van kit, which seems to be very high quality with plenty of very nice cast handrails and footboard brackets. I also got the Slaters sprung 'W' irons, and the S7 wheels to suit. I could pop up a few pictures of the build if you would like...? Just a few shots of the engines... and a few videos.... (note the working reversing gear, and the westo pump errrrr, pumping, on Peter's J67 in the background) (this video didn't work as planned unfortunately..) Regards, JB. __________________________________________ -
The next project, now with Chittle well and truly out of the way, is an incursion into Southern Region territory, with a might-have-been line between Bagshot and Woking. The story goes something like this: The line was built in the early 1920s as an alternative to the light railway proposed between Sunningdale and Woking, via Chobham, which was never built. The line provided a direct connection from Ascot and Bracknell to Woking by branching off at Bagshot, and running through Lightwater, West End, Bisley and Knaphill before joining the main line again near St Johns. The line was electrified and the layout of the station modified in 1967, at the same time as the rest of the South-West mainline to Bournemouth was electrified. At the same time the station was remodelled to accommodate the new oil terminal, with a new station building and access built on the former goods yard. The branch line to Bisley camp was also lifted at this time. The line was closed to passengers in 1976, after the canal bridge near St Johns was weakened in a dredging accident and had to be demolished, with the line beyond West End being lifted. Oil trains continued to the local fuel distributor until 1984, and the loop was retained so that aggregates trains, now coming from the Reading direction, could continue to reverse into the terminal, as the terminal has no run-round facilities. The stone trains are routed through Bracknell, and access the line to Bagshot through the chord at South Ascot. A large expansion in the town, and the progressive nature of the Network SouthEast sector at the time lead to the station having it's passenger service reinstated in 1988. Luckily the 3rd rail equipment had been left, albeit isolated, when the passenger service ceased in the 1970s. The station was originally composed of an island platform, with the main station building, on a now mostly demolished platform, connected by a footbridge. The far platform road has been filled in, and it is in this space that the new station building has been constructed, with the rest of the platform left as a bay. One of the former main lines is extended slightly to act as a headshunt for the run-round and the other main line now forms part of the goods loop. The far platform line (which is now the bay) originally continued to Bisley Camp (hence the name Bisley Junction - Bisley village, further down the line, only had a halt. Evidence of this lines embankment can just be made out, but has mostly been obliterated by the housing development. With the expansion in the town, the oil terminal has started to receive trains again, and another local industry (office furniture) now receives bright steel in vans from the UK and coated steel from abroad. The station at West End is marked by the blue dot on the map, the Stone terminal by the purple. There is one additional station on the line, at Lightwater. Trackplan is more or less like this, and I hope the notes above help to make some sense of it: The inspiration for the layout comes from several sources, St Denys, Chessington South and Addiscombe. I've got this kind of thing planned for the terminus end of the layout: http://neillwood3163.fotopic.net/p51672801.html And that's about as far as its got, save for one try of the templot plans on the board, and a point and a bit (about 1/4 of the way through the second point :mrgreen: )
-
I went along to Dean Hall yesterday evening, for the first time since last month. I took my camera and this time it had a memory card in it so I took a few pictures. I'd better leave Andy or Craig to explain how the big template was produced and printed - I'm afraid the "dark arts" of templot and template production are a bit beyond me at the moment but they were putting it together last night and trying it out for size on the layout. I have to say that I think it looks pretty impressive. So here are a few pics showing this with Andy, Craig, Ralph and Dick. Note one of Craig's wagon etches cunningly placed in the corner of one of the photos. I have to say I think this looks pretty good in the flesh :thup John (knottyjohn) _______________________ A bit of an update as we've not reported back for nearly a month. Progress has been a bit slower than expected but we need to get this part right. The fiddleyard throat to the first six roads has been lifted and cleared as has the old double junction. The old droppers and wiring has been removed allowing the trackbase to be filled and sanded, this is nearly complete but needs a bit more work in some parts of the fiddleyard - PVA can be very stubborn. The main cause of the slow progress has been the need to do further work on the track design. The loop has now been cut back so that it joins back in before the junction, the previous arrangement was incorrect due to the repositioning of the junction and also the canal bridge. Unfortunately this means that the turnout I'd previously completed needs to be rebuilt. :wall The crossing and slip arrangements have also been very slightly (but it still altered nearly all the crossing work!) to give a better and more prototypical arrangement. The drawing work for the front at least is now complete and last night saw Craig and myself crawling around Dean Hall's floor sticking rather large sheets of paper together, hopefully KnottyJohn will be along with some photos. This wasn't the easiest of tasks trying to get everything to line up but we think we've got it near enough and the alignment when placed over the layout was satisfactory. This now means that we can get on with the small amount of woodwork required and start putting the balsa back into place. We've lined up an electrician to rework the fiddle yard control panel, though with interlocking required on the front now we may well have a look at the Merg CBUS system. This, hopefully, will give us the flexibility to be able to modify the fiddle yard later without having to completely rework the control panel again and also enable interlocking to be incorporated on the front. It's early days and we've no idea of the cost yet. Also on the electrics, New Hey's outing to the Members' Day has brought the realisation that the layout needs to be sectionalised (don't confuse with isolating sections etc) so as to prevent a short in one location stopping the whole layout and also to protect the controller. The shorting issue has always been a problem but until people started putting solutions forward for Andy C's issues we weren't aware that there was anything that could be done about them. The solution in the short term is to use car brake light/indicator bulbs though an electronic solution may be implemented later. Most of the track feed wiring needs to be redone anyway so designing power blocks (sections) in at this stage is not a big issue. Hopefully next week will see reconstruction work begin in earnest. Andy G _______________________ Last night was good as it both marked a successful sign-off on a newly finalised track layout which fitted without issue as well as the first night in a while of forward progress where we've now reversed the layout as far as it needs to go and we can really start going forward again. The car bulbs were a nice revelation, i'd always wanted to put a breaker in the fiddle yard anyway but also knew of the problems my Dynamis had with them. Nice simple engineering that I sometimes overlook works anyway and it just beens we need to be careful what we connect our dropper wires too when the track is relaid to ensure we can put bulbs/breakers on different parts in the future. Plenty of track to get on with although in my case a finished wagon etch is the priority so we can build a few ready for the October show (and people stop nagging to buy some ). The plan also means the scenic guys now know the new boundaries of all their hills etc. Craig
-
Prototype Track Detail - Ramsbottom
craigwelsh posted a blog entry in Slattocks Junction - MMRS P4 Layout
Well, I must admit to having not heard of wiring the check rails before, but taking the belt and braces approach it will only take a little bit of effort to put some wire across. I was a little sceptical of Martin's comments about bolt holes in the end of check rails but having been up to Ramsbottom this afternoon to photograph the rail anchor bolts (exciting eh?) two of the three turnouts that I could see had check rails with bolt holes in them. Firstly an outside view of the anchor bolts Rail anchor bolts at Ramsbottom It turns out that these 'side' bolts are all over the turnouts as shown in this side shot of the checkrails and crossing vee So it looks like I'll need to find a way of producing them, first thoughts are resin casting. And now those check rail holes Anybody know what the dimensions are? I would guess 1" holes 2" from the end and then a further four inches. Actual modelling not an awful lot of progress this weekend. I've redrawn the tandem turnout for the third time and I'm finally happy with where everything now fits. This and the B8 that fits toe to toe with it have now been laid out and all of the sleepers cut and prepared - I suppose that is quite a bit of work in itself. I've started on the common crossing but couldn't get it together correctly last night so gave it up to try again when I wasn't so tired. One thing that had puzzled me was that the Exactoscale templates show the break between the wing rail and the closure rail between the fourth and fifth chair whereas Templot shows it as between the third and fourth - which was right? I could just make out from photographs in books that it looked as though Martin was correct and having looked at the examples at Ramsbottom today these backed that up, but why do Exactoscale show it between the next sleepers? Wing Rail Length Also no sign of scrape marks on the check rails. Andy G -
One of the problems we've had with the trackwork was the realisation just over twelve months ago that the junction should have a trailing crossing in front of it. After deliberating what to do the decision was made to knuckle down and produce it. The problem was that the junction is on the side of the layout, to the right of the bottom of the first picture and therefore the only location that the cross over could go was on the bend, which was already closing in on the minimum that you'd want large locos to negotiate at speed in P4. It was a difficult task taking most of the year to complete it. When the opportunity arose to relay the trackwork the chance to redraw it all in Templot was grasped as it was hoped that this would enable a better flow of trackwork to be achieved - we didn't have access to Templot when the mainlines were drawn x number of years ago. To cut to the chase the radius across the crossing came out at 38" which is too tight to propel wagons across without buffer locking and yet the turnouts were aesthetically too long for the location. A number of options were drawn up, none of which were entirely satisfactory until Dick Petter came up with a suggestion completely off the wall - move the junction onto the front of the layout. The immediate thought was that there was no way we would get the tracks back round to the fiddle yard in the space available and at a reasonable radius, however, a rough drawing in Templot quickly proved that there was a chance that this might work. At a group meeting everybody agreed that this new layout was a considerable improvement on the old plan and that we should if at all possible implement this. So, no longer will the junction lurk in the wings of the layout but will instead take centre stage enabling more options for the operating sequence. The original track layout can be seen in first photo repeated below. The following shows the new trackplan And a close of the main P&C work The left hand crossing will in fact be a single slip to provide the trailing cross over in front of the junction as well as providing access to the goods yard for Manchester bound trains. The left hand route at the junction takes trains to Bury and the right hand to Rochdale. For those who know the area this is in reality Castleton South Junction but moved half a mile further south and modified with the addition of a goods yard and a Manchester bound loop (the outer track). There is no station platform on the layout. The station building will be built on the bridge at the Manchester (left) end and the platforms are presumed to be on the fiddle yard side of the back scene. The reasoning behind this was that stations take up a lot of space but do not provide much in the way of operation. Progress to date has seen much of the plain track for the goods yard built as half track (one rail fixed to the sleepers prior to laying, the second rail is then gauged from the first) and laying of this was about to commence when Dick's suggestion was eagerly pounced on. It was decided that it would be prudent not to lay anything until the trackplan was finalised (the original idea was just a relaying of the track). A lot of effort has gone into the development of a Templot plan for the trackwork and this has been absolutely brilliant as Dick has been able to point out all of my mistakes before we have started to build - a lot cheaper and much less frustrating! Having somebody to hand who can advise as to what would and would not have occured trackwise has been a massive benefit to the group. The Society has thankfully allowed us to purchase a large quantity of P4 Track Co. (P4TC) parts so that we can relay the track to the highest standards. The goods yard, head shunt and loop will be laid on traditional ply sleepers with functioning P4TC chairs and the mainlines will utilise P4TC full height sleepers as well. We hope that this will give a variation in track height since the mainlines will have received more maintenance than the other lines and thereby have been slightly more raised. We may also incorporate a degree of cant on the bends. The P&C work will all be built on ply timbers whether full height or traditional half height. Dick has offered to build the double junction and will be using traditional ply and rivet techniques whereas I prefer to build using the technique suggested in Iain Rice's book, a rivet every fifth sleeper or so and functional plastic chairs in between. Hopefully once all of the cosmetic chairs and other wonderful plastic bits and bobs from P4TC have been fitted all of this will look not only consistent but very much like the prototype. I've nearly finished the first of the turnouts so I may be able to put some photos of that up over the next couple of days. Craig persuaded me to have a go at fitting rail anchors between the switch and the stock rail and right fiddly they were, but I think worthwhile - you'll have to wait for the photos to decide for yourselves. The turnout has taken longer than I'd hoped but I've been trying to get it as perfect as possible both cosmetically and functionally. Andy G
