Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for 'Templot' in topics.


Didn't find what you were looking for? Try searching for:


More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • BRM Zone
    • BRM Magazine
  • Trade & Products Zone
    • Products & Trade area
    • Model Shop Guide
    • Media
    • Wanted
  • Modelling Zone
    • BRM/RMweb Cakebox Challenge
    • Modellers' Blogs
    • Layout & Workbench Content
    • Scale Specific
    • Modelling Questions, Help and Tips
    • Skills & Knowledge Centre
    • Power, Control & DCC
    • Prototype
    • Continental/Overseas
    • Special Interests
    • Modelling musings & miscellany
  • Area Groups, Clubs & Societies, Exhibitions & Social
  • About RMweb
  • Narrow Gauge Forum
  • Garden Railways Forum
  • Model Engineering Forum

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

  • RMweb Exhibition/Event Calendar
  • Warners Exhibitions

Categories

  • 2mm scale
  • 4mm scale
  • 7mm scale
  • Other scales
  • Demonstration stand

Categories

  • OO / 4mm scale
  • N / 2mm scale
  • Other scales
  • Books

Product Groups

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 6,011 results

  1. Many thanks for everyone's comments - really appreciated! I'm a bit of a beginner when it comes to the details of German railways. I was pretty good at reading German back in school days (although never as good at speaking). Are there any quite general books anyone would recommend? I just thought to myself "I wonder if there is a relevant MIBA Special issue?" - I looked at their online store, and sure enough a recent special on branch lines seems to have a nice little feature on "Typische kleine Bahnhöfe an Nebenbahnen" on p.8 here: https://shop.vgbahn.info/media/pdf/Blick in diese Ausgabe/12012119.pdf . It looks like my prototype photo is much more like the third example down, but I see what you mean about loops! So this would effectively be a second loop on the top side of the layout - I'd definitely want somewhere I could leave wagons while still passing through trains on the main loop. The second plan actually uses A5 turnouts for the goods siding (rather than B6 for the rest) so I guess I could accommodate this without too much trouble. I like this idea - a nice simple way of keeping room for one wagon by the goods shed without a loop, and without forcing it too far across the layout. But perhaps less prototypical? I'll have a bit more of a play in Templot and see how the options look J
  2. Now I've built the return curves as separate boards I've been working on a new track plan to fit between them. I'm sticking to the 1200x500mm size of a slab of pink insulation foam as a convenient total size, not least because it is also the length of the short edge of a sheet of ply - and I have a stock of suitable strips of 6mm ply leftover from another aborted project. I felt like this would give me plenty of space to model a small station and viaduct scene in Z, but once its all laid out, I'm still quite short of space! Here is a draft plan drawn up in Templot with a gentle S curse over most of the length to give it a bit more of an organic look. The turnouts are all B6 size, which I'll build using code 40 rail and PCB sleepers as per the samples further up this thread. Posing a few buildings and bits of stock on the plan gives a sense of how it will look. A very random selection of stock (what I happened to have unboxed) but it makes the capacity of the loop and sidings clear: the platform loop only just accommodates a loco and two coaches; the goods shed siding holds two 2-axle wagons, and the headshunt / dock holds one wagon. This all feels a bit tight! I'm torn between ideally wanting a longer station loop and sidings, and the feeling that it would take away from the scenic side of the layout. While I like the idea of doing a little bit of tokenistic shunting, really I want the layout to be about watching trains go by, through some nice scenery. Perhaps that still points towards finding a way of making a longer passing loop though, to create a regular operating pattern of letting meaningful length trains pass. Swapping the loop turnout to the current location of the goods siding turnout would give that extra length, but would mean the goods siding would probably have to cross the station entrance in order to be workable! (but not without precedent in small German stations? e.g. @2mmMark 's post with photos and a plan of Emmelshausen in 1990). I'd be pleased to hear any thoughts on this! Final photo: the two "train set" wagons I've weathered and fitted with Microtrains couplings posed on the Faller viaduct - the open wagon now with a load courtesy of a random bush in my front garden! Justin
  3. Hi Rich, On your first question, the point rail was generally the one on the main route, which might not always be on the straight route, (e.g. a loop coming off the outside of a curve). Of course on a curved turnout or a 'Y' there is no 'straight' route! Secondly, like Izzy, I have no experience of the Association jigs (I made some of my own for filing the crossing rails and switches), but your second attempt looks the better one to me. If you run your finger along the tapered edge of the point rail, you should be barely able to feel where the splice rail starts. As I said earlier, the tip of the splice rail should be at, or just beyond, the end of the taper on the point rail. You DO NOT want it to be nearer to the tip of the point rail as this will create a 'step' which will catch the wheel flanges. Its tip needs to be sitting tightly against the point rail. I have always built my track directly in situ straight on top of the Templot drawing. I lay the two stock rails first and then position the tip of the point rail using two button gauges, after which I fix the splice rail in position again using a button gauge between its tip and the opposite stock rail and either a roller gauge between the other end and the stock rail or, more often, a short length of Easitrac sleepers slid onto both at that end. If you have the Magazine back number file (another mine of information) look at my articles on P4 of the February 2012 and P71 of the August/September 2012 issues. Jim
  4. Managed to get a couple of hours today, with the intention of building another point. My (stupid) PC laptop had other ideas however and spent 96 minutes doing a bl**dy Microsoft update! So I resorted instead to trying out the filing jig and also the assembly jig. The filing jig, having watched the 2mm Association video that was kindly posted earlier on the thread, really does make things very simple. I made two 'vee' items this afternoon, the first was filed and assembled the filing jig. Question for those knowledgable guys - go you put the rails in the assembly side of this jig upside down or right way up, or doesn't it matter? I am assuming the straight rail (rather than the diagonal one) would always be the straight ahead/direct route through the point? That looks to be quite good to my eye (am I deceiving myself?) the two rails are offset, and despite the cruelness of the photograph, the soldering was reasonable as well - this was the first thing done on this new temperature controlled iron, which is fantastic - why did I leave it in the box for 18 months! Having taken that 'vee' I then tried to place it in the assembly jig, but it wouldn't slot in easily (read not at all) so decided that there were obviously some slight differences between the two. So having filed down another two pieces of rail, I assembled and soldered the second one actually in the assembly jig That to me does not look quite as good and I think the branch rail (left hand in this picture) is set too far back. Also, as I expected, the aluminium jig acted as a huge heatsink. So when I get to building the next point, I'll go back to the original way of producing the point straight onto the template (having also calibrated the printer for Templot) but using the filing jib to file and assemble the vee. As ever, I welcome comments. Rich
  5. EM Gauge Society & Scalefour Society Skills Day 2020 Didcot Civic Hall, Britwell Road, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 7JN Saturday March 14th 2020 - 11.00am to 4.00pm We are pleased to announce that the EM Gauge Society and the Scalefour Society are holding in March 2020, another ‘Skills Day’ event. This is the first one to take place in this region and builds on the successful formula of an informal, informative gathering of modellers. As in previous years, the EMGS involvement is again being funded by the bequest of Chris Kedgley, former Chairman of the EM Gauge Society and active member of the Scalefour Society who passed away in June 2013. Didcot is a famous railway town with Didcot Parkway Railway Station being within walking distance of the Civic Hall. Even in March, for a weekend break the area has much to offer railway enthusiasts, Didcot Railway Centre is within walking distance while Pendon Museum at Long Wittenham is only a couple of miles distant. As ever, the emphasis will be on ‘showing and telling’ and so will feature around eighteen experienced modellers demonstrating a wide range of skills and a variety of innovative techniques. All this will be supported by an expected total of six quality layouts to inspire you and illustrate some of these methods in practice. Date: Saturday March 14th 2020 Location: Didcot Civic Hall, Britwell Road, Didcot OX11 7JN Web: https://www.didcotcivichall.co.uk Opening Times: 11.00am to 4.00pm Admission: Entry is FREE, but donations are encouraged. Catering: Teas and coffees will be available. For lunch, a wide variety of hostelries and cafes are close at hand. Layouts Brighton East(EM) - Dave Smith Cheddar (P4) - Chris Challis Edge Hill (EM) - Paul Segar Great Bardfield(P4) - David Hawkins Lower Exbury (P4) - Alison and David Barker Westcliff (EM) - Richard Butler Demonstrations Ready to Run Locomotive Conversion - Mike Ainsworth Signals - Mark Tatlow Scenics - Paul Ash Weathering Techniques - Mick Bonwick (Great Missenden) Resistive Soldering Techniques - David Brandreth Alex Jackson & Dingham Auto couplings - David Bridges Laser Cutting Techniques - Jonathan Buckie Templot - Phil Chudley Coaches - Philip Hall Painting & Lining - Geoff Haynes Trees – Ray Hodson Weathering Diesel period stock - Peter Johnson Not all wagons are the same - Duncan Redford Soldering - Roger Sawyer Trackwork - Phil Tattershall Wagon Suspension & Springing Systems - Andrew Ullyott Loco Clinic - Tim Venton Architectural Modelling - Grahame Vickery Electronics - MERG The EMGS Test Track will be in attendance and will be situated adjacent to Tim Venton’s stand. Accessibility: Wheelchair accessible This event is being organised by the various area groups in the South and South West of England of the EM Gauge Society www.emgs.org and the Scalefour Society http://scalefour.org/ Contact: Tony Sullivan, Email: mnw1919(at)gmail.com
  6. pelhama

    Bridgtown

    Afternoon All, So, it’s been a fair while again since my last update – Christmas has been and gone and we’re in to 2020. Not a great deal has happened – a few boxes have arrived with various rolling stock manufacturers’ latest releases, but possibly the most significant delivery was on Christmas Eve. Santa, cunningly disguised as the local Postman, dropped off a nice parcel from British Finescale containing: This was my two pledges worth of kits and jigs, which covers the scenic trackwork for the layout; now I just need the time, space and money to get the baseboards ordered. The previously mentioned changes to the track alignment for using the British Finescale products has led to a review of the scenic plan, and revisions to accommodate the changes. This is currently a work in progress, and probably will be for some time as it is a very time-consuming process. The Templot plan has been imported and ‘tidied up’, I am now adjusting the scenic elements around it. Some of the tweaks are just that – to fit correctly around the realigned track, some others are a little more substantial, such as re-positioning roads. The latter is part of my plan to avoid the road disappearing into the backscene, and to obscure all scenic ‘exits’ as best as possible. I'll upload some images once I've made progress worth sharing. This of course also means the scale mock-up will need revising and will probably be better to start from scratch on that; I can hopefully reuse the buildings though. Anyway, better get on, I’ve got tea to drink, layouts to plan and build… Cheers, Mark
  7. I suspect SCARM is used for so many small and medium layouts is because you can get away with the free version for small/medium layouts, but have to pay for it to do large ones. Too cynical? A Templot user here too (user might be a bit of an overstatement- bodger might be a more accurate description of my way of using it!)
  8. Nothing at all to do with baseboards, so apologies for taking things well OT, but I do smile a bit when I read all the discussions of the quirks of SCARM and other software applications for track-planning. They doubtless save time/effort when it comes to planning large layouts with complex track formations, but I'm a long way from being convinced that they are a good substitute for a pad of squared paper, a pencil, and a rubber when it comes to devising modest-sized layouts. Something like Templot for designing bespoke, high-fidelity track-work I do understand, BTW, but that's a different application.
  9. Thanks for that. Hope you enjoy the journey. I've always enjoyed model railways, but this latest foray into 2FS, with the support and encouragement of the local area group, really has spurred me on to do something, and do it well, to the best of my ability (which might not be saying much!!). There has been no progress the past few days because of work and day-to-day life, as well as the latest 'North Mercia' group meeting last Thursday. A bit of Templot work on the track layout for the hidden sidings was achieved at the latest meeting. They are slightly complicated by the need for some to be changeover sidings, so that loaded or empty wagons enter the scene, and empty or loaded wagons respectively leave, but I think I am making progress. I need to do some testing on gradients to see what works and what doesnt. All this was done, in between drinking tea, discussing the merits of various topics and admiring the progress with Laurie's own Yeovil Town layout! The sight of the baseboard with raised trackbed ready for track laying has spurred me onwards though. So assuming the next point to be produced works well and I get the electrics set up on it, hopefully I may be able to start work on the first couple of baseboards (although storing them is a totally different issue). I promised myself back in April last year, I was going to get to grips with the trackwork and know that I was happy with it before any wood was cut. In related news, the temperature controlled soldering iron has been dug out of its hiding place, the replacement solder (suggest earlier on this thread) has arrived, and the Association 'vee' jig has been paid for, and I am just awaiting its handover from our friendly postman. So maybe on my day off next week, Point No. 3 may begin construction. We had some friendly discussion at last Thursday's meeting about the best way to build such things, whether to start from the longest straight running rail, or as I tend to do, start from the 'vee'. We concluded it was a personal preference decision, but I'll try and do some pictures for the next point, in the hope that people may be able to advise if I am going wrong, or could do things better. Finally of this update, I had a PM during the week from a fellow 'rmWebber' and I have accidentally managed to delete it - so apologies to whomever it was! I recall it came about from something he'd read on here, so if your reading this again, could you get in touch!! I remember one part of the query was on how the points will be operated? They will need to be electrically worked in someway, shape or form. While I have been keeping several options in mind, I am coming round to the thinking that operation by servos is the best way, which themselves will be controlled by MERG boards. I've looked at Megapoints for a few months and had a couple of conversations with Dave, but given that I am now staying DC on the new layout, and that MERG CBUS boards will handle other aspects, it seems to make sense to connect them into the CBUS network. Well that is my current thought anyway.
  10. For anyone else's information, I've just been playing around with Templot this morning with the following parameters. Design vehicle length - 920 inches (prototype) - 306 mm (model) Design vehicle width - 111 inches (prototype) - 37 mm (model) Design vehicle bogie centres - 666 inches (prototype) - 222 mm (model) Desired clearance from design vehicle to edge of kinetic envelope - 6 inches (prototype) - 2 mm (model). Inner track centre-line radius = 762 mm (30") - outside track centre-line radius = 818 mm (ie track centre to centre distance = 56 mm). Templot indicates that these two kinetic envelopes don't overlap, although they are relatively close to touching and in all honesty are about as close as I could reasonably go. If I reduce the track centre to centre distance by 1 mm, then the envelopes do touch - albeit that just means that the space between non-moving stock is fractionally less than 4 mm (ie twice the specified clearance). Of course the issue is whether I could lay to a 1 mm tolerance and I think that there is supposed to be 18" (6 mm clearance in real life). Bogie centres is based on the Heljan Cargowaggon, but I have increased the length of the vehicle to that of a Mark 3 to produce a greater end throw (perhaps not by enough though) and left the default width (because I probably won't be running outside cylinder locomotives). However, if there is a need to accommodate a larger design vehicle, then more than 56 mm is definitely required with a 30" (762 mm) minimum radius.
  11. I, along with many others, stick the Templot plans onto the cork and build the track directly onto that. The sequence is the same; stick Templot plans to ply and cut out the road bed, attach road bed to boards with risers etc, glue chamfered cork to road bed and stick Templot plans to this.
  12. If you're laying track to set-track radii, then you should be using the set-track spacing (67 mm) rather than the streamline spacing (51 mm), which is effectively designed for layouts that are fairly straight or have relatively generous curves and by that I mean those with a minimum radius of at least three or four feet. Ultimately, the set-track spacing is based on what is required at 1st / 2nd radius, so since your curves are larger that this, there is some scope to move the tracks closer together than 67 mm, but I'd still have thought that you'd be looking at needing something like 60 mm between track centres to provide adequate clearance, but the exact distance required is determined by your worst stock combination. I effectively have the same issue as you, albeit I am trying to work to a minimum radius of 30" (762 mm). I'd like to lay my double track at the streamline spacing on my curves, but I know that won't be possible with my design vehicles, which I think will be Mark 3 coaches and Cargowaggons. These are both longer than Mark 1s, but I think I'm going to have to adopt a centre to centre distance of somewhere between 55 mm and 60 mm for my 762 mm radius curves. The general advice is to pin the track down and then using a pen or pencil held against your design vehicles (outside ends of the vehicle on the inner track and centre of the longest bogie vehicle on your outside track and check that the two plotted envelopes don't overlap. However, I think there is also an option to do the same thing in Templot, so that's my approach at the moment, since I'm not quite at the track laying stage. I agree that some sort of look up table would be good for those of us at the planning stage.
  13. Friday night and all is well... I'm happy to be on a roll right now with a virtual production line taking each board in turn. Added seven lengths of SMP to the pointwork and all the droppers are in place ready for the bus wiring. When did it change from 'buss' wiring to 'bus' wiring? When I was in electro mech, we always talked about buss bars and a bus was something you got on to go down town. Funny thing, the English language..... Once all was in place and tested out, I airbrushed a coat of primer and will add the brown track colour later tonight. Whooppee do....more ballasting over the next few days... The more observant will see that I pre ballast the turnouts as I got fed up gumming up the works. A liberal coat of PVA first and then set the turnout into the glue. Immediately tip on the ballast and hoover up the excess. Job done and it all still works... In case you're wondering how I know where to lay the track, I've managed to come with with a system that works for me. Print out Templot plan and tape to the ply sheet. Cut out the ply to the Templot track bed drawing. Take a small drill (1-2mm) and drill holes down one of the rails. I never used to bother with the pencil lines, but found the holes became difficult to see once a good spread of PVA was added to stick the cork down. I slice down some cork roll to 17mm width and stick that in place along the pencil lines. The bevelled edge strips are then added and the final job is to stick down the track with one of the rails aligned to the dark bevelled edge where it joins the plain 17mm cork. Double track is two lengths of 17mm cork plus a centre strip of 27.5mm to give me the correct spacing between the two tracks. Pretty simple really, but as always ever willing to hear if you have a better method. Son in Law is dragging me out for a round of golf over the weekend and I have a Stableford Qualifier on Monday, so progress may be slower over the next few days. Fear not, I'm determined to get round to the other side, before it warms up again and work takes a few months break......
  14. Afternoon guys, Well as I thought might happen, work got in the way! However, I have spent some time trying to get to grips with Designspark this afternoon. Still not totally there, but making progress and may hopefully get a circuit diagram on here over the weekend - I hit an immediate snag in that DS is a PC software and I am Apple Mac! So out came the old PC laptop that I use for Templot, which isn't fast or modern, but I am finding my way around DS on it slowly ... I think! Processor I understand the various aspects to PIC processors, but I am still working out which is the best one to use for this project. I have initially chosen the PIC18F27J13 - a 48Mhz 5v 28-pin chip with 128Kb flash programme memory that is surface mount, and reportedly low power. It may well prove to be overkill for the project, but we'll see. It provides UART, SPI and I2C if needed, along with two 10-bit PWM modules, and two Capture/Compare/PWM modules (not sure what the different between the two types is as yet) and three 8-bit timbers, four 16-bit timers - which may well come in handy if I can use them as I am hoping to. There is also four external interrupts and a 10-channel, 12-bit Analog to Digital converter input. It also provides On Chip serial programming via two-pins, which may be useful if the code needs to change at any point post development. The data sheet explains that decoupling capacitors are needed for the power supply pins. Can somebody tell me what a decoupling capacitor does? Is it just to smooth out the inbound power supply and minimise any spikes/drops? It is suggesting a 0.1uf (100nF) 10-20v capacitor. My plan is to come out on Pin 25 - RB4/CCO4 - one of the PWM output pins that supports unto 5.5v, although at this stage in the proceedings, the actual pin used is a minor matter, and may of course change depending on where it lies on the PCB / other input/outputs. At this point a question, while reading up and learning about various things, I discovered you can get Half H Bridge DC Motor Driver chips, with the PWM feed of the PIC providing the necessary power. So is it better to use transistors etc, or a Motor Driver? If the latter, would it be beneficial to me to progress Andy's original plan so that my understanding of electronics improves then change later if I want to a Motor Driver, or is it better for model railway use to stick with the transistors either way? Looking at the circuit Andy provided, I am going to stay with the bi-polar transistors that Andy suggested initially ( @sharris I'll look at the advantages to changing that to a MOSFET subsequently, but just want to try and keep my feet on the ground at the moment - but thanks for making that suggestion). In trying to identify the options for the bipolar-transistors, I am assuming that the maximum outbound (emitter?) current needs to be 12v .. given that its going to the track we don't need anything higher? I am also trying to understand the purpose of the four resistors in the circuit. I know the principal use of a resistor, so I am assuming that the first one (lets call it R1) between the PWM output and the transistor is limiting the electrical input to a level suitable for the transistor (T1), the same - although a different resistance level - for R2 (between T1 and T2). I have not yet grasped the purpose of R3 (connecting to +12v) and R4 (connection T2 to 0v), although I assume for R4 that this is part of what is required to avoid any form of short circuit on T2? IN terms of adding in a diode to deal with any back EMF, I am assuming that it needs to go after the last transistor and link back to 0V in order to take any EMF out of the circuit? I'll apologise now for those who know electronics, if the above questions seem stupid and blatantly obvious! I am determined to get there and understand this Rich
  15. Hi William, That's not directly supported, but it is not difficult to do if needed: 1. set the required flare length and/or end-gap, and a machined end. 2. wait until the track design is finalised, as with shoving timbers, etc., otherwise you may need to do it all over again. 3. split out the machined end of the wing or check rail as a separate partial template. 4. set peg free, and then move the peg manually to the start of the flare (CTRL+F8 or 8 mouse action). 5. rotate the end of the rail around the peg as required (F8 mouse action) and/or adjust the end-gap at the same time, like this: 6. store it, and ideally add a prefix tag so that you can easily group the two templates later if needed. When you get into Templot at this level, it is better to swap to the Templot Club forum, rather than RMweb. For example my previous comments about adjusting the wing and check rails were covered in greater detail in this topic: http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=2555&forum_id=1&jump_to=17633#p17590 cheers, Martin.
  16. Thank you Martin, changes duly made. Do you have the functionality in Templot to illustrate that special machined wing rail?
  17. The following is a tandem turnouts in 4SF - It is a standard B6 derived tandem with the lower/left road exiting at 12 degrees to match the standard Peco bullhead pointwork I'm using elsewhere: However as you can see, the middle crossing's right wing rail is miniscule. In practise I would probably plane off both sides of the rail to extend it into the nook of the crossing - it just feels very small!
  18. Hi Mike, Just a reminder that an XtrackCAD track plan can be exported as a DXF file and then imported into Templot's background shapes. This gives you a guide to work over in Templot which will be the correct size automatically, unlike a screenshot or printout from XTrackCAD which would need adjusting to size, and go fuzzy when zoomed. More info about importing DXFs from XTrackCAD here: http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=3049&forum_id=1 cheers, Martin.
  19. Happy new year everybody! I hope you all had an enjoyable festive season. Well, I didn’t quite make my pre-Christmas deadline for the new baseboards, but I was only a few days out, and between work, Christmas shopping, visiting family and friends, I’ve managed to build the remaining baseboards and re-assemble Talbothays. The boards are almost identical to the existing ones, in a typical plywood top and timber frame style, held together with DCC Concepts alignment dowels and either spring clips or bolts depending on the type of connection. I had mis-calculated the amount of timber I would use, and had to buy more from the local DIY store, only to find out the dimensions were slightly different, but that didn’t cause too many headaches and everything fits together well. After putting the boards back together, I printed out the track plan I had prepared in XtrackCAD and laid it out to see how it would all fit. I’m fairly happy with it, considering how complicated the station throat is, incorporating a curve and a baseboard joint. I’m happy that I have avoided pointwork over the board joint and that I have a fairly good flow to the track - it’s not perfect, but it will suffice. The next step is to re-draw the plan in Templot to create some pointwork templates to build from. Hopefully at that stage I can get an even better flow to the plan. It will be some time before track is laid on this part of the layout though. As I explained in the last post, I had to build these boards to clear space under the layout for storage. Now that job is done, I’ll be returning attention to Talbothays and developing the station scene more. The first job is to build the platform tops, then build the station footbridge...a little kit-bashing project I’m really looking forward to. I’ve not got much time to spend in the railway room over the next few weeks, but I do have my birthday next week which I traditionally book off work to play with my train set (what else is there to do in January?!) and a week off at the end of the month, so stay tuned for scenic updates!
  20. You'll need to change your signature Martin: "Templot; 40 years in the making. Brain; 3,000,000 years in the making"
  21. Templot track plan printed out and laid on the railway room floor to get an idea of how the beast will look. Type 2 diesel providing unusual and rather feeble motive power for the down "Waverley". I'm definitely getting a tingle here.
  22. Further to an older thread on the forum, I am now starting in earnest on a small layout (a lot smaller than the Ouse Viaduct!) after much pondering and planning. Working name is St Martin-sur-Orb, and it is inspired by the ex-Midi line west of Bedarieux in the Languedoc. It was once going to be 'based on', but has been downgraded to 'inspired by' because of all the liberties I am taking, not least its electrification (of which more anon). My knowledge of French railways has been on a steep learning curve, which has been fun, and I have acquired a fair selection of rolling stock including steam, diesel and electric locos, autorails, coaches and wagons. Locos mostly second hand from Roco, with a couple of Jouef - eyes water a bit at some of the prices for new European models! The baseboards are built using Tim Horn's modules. I started with 2 x 3ft, and 18in deep, but later added a 2ft middle section. This is about the limit I can get in my car. LED lighting has been fitted. It will be a through station so there will be fiddle yards at each end. I've settled on a plan after much pottering about with Templot; very simple with one end of a station/passing loop, a couple of short sidings, and a long industrial siding at the back which will also go off-scene into the fiddle yard. This will run along the road at the back, in front of shops/bars/houses - which may be in half-relief (thanks to Captain Kernow for that suggestion). So there's only four points. Control will be DC with front operation from either end. All track work on-scene will be Tillig, with the four points all being their mid-radius EW3s. The first one went down a few days ago, on Carr's cork strip and droppers already attached. At this point I hit a snag in that the plain flexitrack I had was Code 100 and not the Code 83 of the pointwork. This has now been rectified - the Code 100 might see use in the fiddle yards. Meanwhile, I received as a (requested) Christmas present a laser-cut kit for a generic PLM station building. I know it's not a Midi or even PO prototype, but to my eyes it has the feel of such a building, and ultimately Rule 1 applies. The kit is made by a company called Bois Modelisme, and was obtained very efficiently from the Jura Modelisme online shop - no doubt there are other outlets. I have to say I am very impressed with this kit, with the details of doors, windows, stonework etc being cut in card of some kind, not the Rowmark plastic I was expecting it to be, and the fineness of the door and window glazing bars and representation of panelling is amazing. So I've spent a few hours between Christmas and New Year getting on with it. What do you think the colour scheme should be? Typical photos suggest light cream with pale blue/grey for the woodwork, but I'm open to suggestions. What about the corner stones and door/window surrounds? Existing structures are often in a pale pink base colour, but I don't know if they are original or repaints after line closure. More details to follow as I progress.
  23. Hello hayfield, thanks for the reply. Although I'm a little old now but I used to make my living by building 'computers'. Ensconced in a deep vault on the corner of Gracechurch St. and Leadenhall St in the City of London during the early to late eighties I would turn them out by the dozen to whatever specification was required for the City banks I worked for. Building them was easy. After the initial programming I did not have to use them but the programming was simple. I used the software provided to do the job so I'm no stranger to IT. Current IT I am though! I'm not a fool but a practical man and I can still rely on my memory on what track looked like and how 'deformed' it could become in intensive service in heavily used situations so I can very easily replicate that condition in model form. It is not rocket science. I like to use code 55 F/B in industrial situations in 4mm. as it looks the business and that 'light' rail was very common in the once very common private sidings. Thankyou Chris Nevard for that and 'Brewery Quay'. Look, the bottom line is that I am a old fish filleter and barrow lad off the Grimsby fish market which was probably the largest, in mileage terms, of any 'goods shed' in the country! It was a bloody hard life and I loved it. However, regarding WT and any other 'forums' I reckon I'm throwing the towel in on all of 'em and returning to 'lurking' but I certainly agree that Mr. Wynne 'Templot' is a huge leap into track building and planning. Most modellers I know make good use of it but it's not for me. I'm running out of years! I just build temporary 'shunting planks' every couple of years and I regard it as my 'trainset' in which I can happily while away the hours with a couple of beers. This is an edit. I have been building track to P4 standards now for over 40 years and that standard has never let me down.
  24. Harry Hopefully you will pick this thread up at some point. In some ways I do understand your reluctance in not wanting to learn new computer skills, I have done likewise at work for a new computer system which has nothing to do with the work I do and as I am retiring in 4 mths I believe its a waste of time and effort. Having said this I use a part at home which is of use So far as Templot goes unlike 15 years ago there are no skills required in making turnouts, crossings, 3 ways or slips. As they all are generated by the system by pressing the correct command button, or just befriend someone who uses Templot as the templates can be sent as a PDF Good luck with WT, but I have looked at it from time to time finding it of little interest
  25. Hi David, Only Terry Flynn at AMRA can answer that. He always refers to it as H0-SF at 16.25mm gauge/1.05mm flangeway (as shown in Templot for H0-SF). The difference between the 2 pages is a mystery to me, since "check gauge" is mostly relevant to crossings. Either way it is 15.2mm MIN, which is the critical dimension. When I asked him about the gauge difference, his reply was that it related to the manufacture of the track gauges, in that there is no 3-point gauge available. cheers, Martin.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.