Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, alastairq said:

I believe condensed milk is efficacious in the making of Tablet?  Taking over, as it did, from cream..which has issues when heated.

 

I recall making tablet at home...oddly, rarely being able to sample my own handiwork...

Tablet doesn't keep well! :nono: At least not in our house!  When the kids were still at home it rarely lasted a day!  :(

 

Jim

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Work in progress ....

 

20210831_113440.jpg.66697a38f7a84e943d4d7fb58137904d.jpg

 

 

I'm really making an effort to break the back of the goods stock with the revenue earning stock of the WNR, excluding livestock and minerals for the present, tackled en masse. It helps that I am basing the WNR stock on a line of relatively cheap and simple/quick to build kits (Cambrian Models' Gloucester Railway Carriage & Wagon Co. designs). One of my few wise decisions, I feel!

 

There will be detailing to do, but, so far, front to rear:

  • Pair of single bolsters from cut-down Gloucester frames; 2-plank drop-sides (Cambrian Rys bodies on 15' Gloucester frames);
  • Gloucester 1-plank, with work commenced on a second;
  • 4-planks, using scratch-built bodies on 15' Gloucester frames.  The first of the WN's "high capacity" designs. This is a deliberate parallel of GE development, from un-diagrammed 4-planks to Dia.16 5-planks;
  • 2 rows of Gloucester 5-planks - the most prevalent WN design and representing its equivalent of the GE Diagram 16.  I have decided that Aching Constable will stick to wooden underframes, unlike the GE under Holden's direction;
  • The first of the WNR's new "high-sided" opens, using a Gloucester 6 1/2 plank kit. These, I feel are probably built from, say, 1903-4, and I have a feeling that part-way through the first Lot the WN's wagon livery might change. 
  • Covered wagons. These are all to be based on 16' Gloucester underframes.  To the left, the newer design, which is, of course, the old Triang tooling.  The older outside frame ones to the right are being adapted from Linny's 'condensed milk' van.

Linny, once upon a time, cut 5 of these for me. Reckoning that one would, indeed, become a condensed milk van for the WN, I thought to modify the others as WN covered wagons, having assessed that this would actually prove less of a faff than modifying the Triang-Hornby H&B van bodies. The door bracing gives them another nice nod to Holden and the GE wagons.  

 

Linny's condensed milk van, a WN version will appear before too long:

 

post.jpg.17f0bfd82436f718d78f68e9e0cae3eb.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

James,

A delightful collection and rationale for your choice of standardised components.

 

You may have already said, but what couplings are you going to use? I hope you won’t be besmirching them with the ugly tension lock. Them are so many better offerings than that breast: Spratt and winkle are very user friendly while the Alex Jackson is much easier to make than many believe and is damn near invisible at anything like ‘normal’ viewing distances.

ATB

Duncan

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, drduncan said:

James,

A delightful collection and rationale for your choice of standardised components.

 

You may have already said, but what couplings are you going to use? I hope you won’t be besmirching them with the ugly tension lock. Them are so many better offerings than that breast: Spratt and winkle are very user friendly while the Alex Jackson is much easier to make than many believe and is damn near invisible at anything like ‘normal’ viewing distances.

ATB

Duncan

 

Thanks very much, Duncan.

 

I ought to evolve a user friendly coupling system, and the CA goods sidings are all at the back and barely within reach!

 

For the moment, however, I'm going to fit Slater's 3-links.  

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Thanks very much, Duncan.

 

I ought to evolve a user friendly coupling system, and the CA goods sidings are all at the back and barely within reach!

 

For the moment, however, I'm going to fit Slater's 3-links.  

Brave. Very brave…..

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, drduncan said:

the Alex Jackson is much easier to make than many believe and is damn near invisible at anything like ‘normal’ viewing distances.

If you make them from P/B wire, it tarnished to a dark brown colour in time.  The late Colin brady, a fellow 2FS modeller who helped me operate Connerburn, claimed never to have seen them!  he just took it on trust that they were there!

 

41 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

For the moment, however, I'm going to fit Slater's 3-links.  

In that case, there will be no problem in retro-fitting AJ's.  One of the reasons I chose to use AJ's was so that I could retain three link couplings.

 

Jim

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

If you make them from P/B wire, it tarnished to a dark brown colour in time.  The late Colin brady, a fellow 2FS modeller who helped me operate Connerburn, claimed never to have seen them!  he just took it on trust that they were there!

 

In that case, there will be no problem in retro-fitting AJ's.  One of the reasons I chose to use AJ's was so that I could retain three link couplings.

 

Jim

AJs are not the answer for standard 00 and/or small-radius curves.

  • Agree 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

AJs are not the answer for standard 00 and/or small-radius curves.

 

No tight curves on CA (though if there were ever a model of Bishop Lynn docks, that might be different), but CA is certainly [bog] standard OO.

 

I'm not immediately understanding why track gauge is decisive. What is the problem?

 

It seems to me that AJ is a system that relies on absolute precision in mounting the components and 'precision', to be fair, is not a hallmark of my modelling!

 

Anyway, I've ordered the book, so we'll see.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having opened the Pandora’s box of couplings I suppose I ought to say a bit more. So far I’ve used:

tension lock (because I was young and foolish, knowing no better)

kaydee

Spratt & winkle

Alex Jackson

Dinghams

3 link

All have strengths and weaknesses. The right coupling depends on your approach to operation, fidelity, compromises in your approach to modelling, and your layout design. In other words if you want absolute fidelity use 3 links but if all your sidings are out of reach then something isn’t going to work as intended! 


S&w, AJs, dinghams and kaydee all allow remote operation. Kaydee is great for modern image but some might find it obtrusive on steam age layouts, but for me the big disadvantage is the large uncoupling magnets that need to be planned in at an early stage.
 

Both AJ, dingham, s&w use a downward pull and the magnets can be small - my electro magnets are on an m6 bolt as the core and screw into a pilot hole in the track bed. All need some precision in either construction or installation (including kaydees too). Dinghams strike me as needing more patience and skill with a soldering iron than I often exhibit, while s&w and AJ I find easy to make (use the AJ jigs…) but need precision in installing. But again there are jigs available to help you (although I can’t remember jigs for s&w when I was using them, AJ definitely have them).


Other considerations.
Are you intending to play trains with your stock on a club layout? If so you may want to use the same coupling as the other group members (it’s why I first used AJs and I’m glad I did).

 

Does your stock limit your options? I started looking for an alternative to s&w because I had a load of laser cut npcs that because of the layers needed in construction ended up with thick buffer beams that were wider than the distance between the s&w pivot point and the operating dropper (so they wouldn’t fit). Long wheelbase bogie coaches can be difficult with s&w if there is a lot of sideways throw on curves - so layout design is important too. AJ bogie stock does better, but long wheel base non bogie stock will dislike coupling on tight  (c30 inches or less)  curves…


Do you have return loops, turntables (loco or train) or similar? If you do single ended eg male/female types like dingham aren’t  for you as they rely on stock facing the same direction.

 

Basically it’s your railway! If you’ve been lucky enough to play with others layouts think about the coupling they used and how much you enjoyed it (or not). You may not end up with a preferred coupling,but you may be able to knock some off the short list!
 

Duncan

 

Edited by drduncan
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, drduncan said:

Having opened the Pandora’s box of couplings I suppose I ought to say a bit more. So far I’ve used:

tension lock (because I was young and foolish, knowing no better)

kaydee

Spratt & winkle

Alex Jackson

Dinghams

3 link

All have strengths and weaknesses. The right coupling depends on your approach to operation, fidelity, compromises in your approach to modelling, and your layout design. In other words if you want absolute fidelity use 3 links but if all your sidings are out of reach then something isn’t going to work as intended! 

 

 

A very thoughtful and useful summary. 

 

40 minutes ago, drduncan said:

 


S&w, AJs, dinghams and kaydee all allow remote operation. Kaydee is great for modern image but some might find it obtrusive on steam age layouts, but for me the big disadvantage is the large uncoupling magnets that need to be planned in at an early stage.
 

Both AJ, dingham, s&w use a downward pull and the magnets can be small - my electro magnets are on an m6 bolt as the core and screw into a pilot hole in the track bed. All need some precision in either construction or installation (including kaydees too). Dinghams strike me as needing more patience and skill with a soldering iron than I often exhibit, while s&w and AJ I find easy to make (use the AJ jigs…) but need precision in installing. But again there are jigs available to help you (although I can’t remember jigs for s&w when I was using them, AJ definitely have them).

 

I do like the appearance/lack of appearance of the AJs.  I also like the idea that they do not prevent fitting 3-links. I have ordered the book and will evaluate.

 

In the meantime, I think the two major points to consider are;

 

- I do not see that I need anything other than screw-links with passenger stock.  Most trains will be left in rakes, but with the ability to split rakes to add strengtheners and to add 'tail traffic'. On CA, all the passenger traffic will happen at the front of the layout. 

 

- It is the goods stock that concerns me, as the sidings fan out at the back.  There auto uncoupling would be a boon.  Operationally, I don't see myself as one of Nature's shunters, but there will need to be at least one daily goods that would arrive at CA, drop off wagons, pick up others and proceed to Achingham, where, when built, the same happens.  Again, the Achingham plan has goods, maltings and gasworks sidings to the rear!  

 

- Complications There will be some locos that would handle both goods and passenger traffic, but relatively few, and the Wolfringham branch is probably alone in running mixed trains (under its Light Railway Order!). 

 

40 minutes ago, drduncan said:

 


Other considerations.
Are you intending to play trains with your stock on a club layout? If so you may want to use the same coupling as the other group members (it’s why I first used AJs and I’m glad I did).

 

We don't have a club layout available for 'running nights'

 

 

40 minutes ago, drduncan said:

Does your stock limit your options? I started looking for an alternative to s&w because I had a load of laser cut npcs that because of the layers needed in construction ended up with thick buffer beams that were wider than the distance between the s&w pivot point and the operating dropper (so they wouldn’t fit). Long wheelbase bogie coaches can be difficult with s&w if there is a lot of sideways throw on curves - so layout design is important too. AJ bogie stock does better, but long wheel base non bogie stock will dislike coupling on tight  (c30 inches or less)  curves…

 

Good points:

 

- Stock is very varied, so some might well defeat S&W

- Little bogie stock and nothing topping 50', I should think.

- Long w/b non-bogie stock is probably limited to 6 wheel coaches running on 36'' minimum radius, so it sounds as if that might be within AJ tolerances, however, I'm not sure I would fit AJs on passenger stock.  

 

40 minutes ago, drduncan said:

 


Do you have return loops, turntables (loco or train) or similar? If you do single ended eg male/female types like dingham aren’t  for you as they rely on stock facing the same direction.

 

Yes, stock won't turn, locos will always turn and run round.

 

40 minutes ago, drduncan said:

Basically it’s your railway! If you’ve been lucky enough to play with others layouts think about the coupling they used and how much you enjoyed it (or not). You may not end up with a preferred coupling,but you may be able to knock some off the short list!
 

Duncan

 

 

I think I will progress with actually completing stock - with 3-link and screw couplings - and try to get the track sorted and the layout running.

 

It seems to me that AJs and small magnets are sympathetic to a retro fit, so I'll see how I go, while anticipating that I may well have to have recourse to AJs at least for goods stock.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

One option for coaching stock is to use the ex Bill Bedford cast brass couplings sold by Eileens emporium. These allow for fixed rakes of coaching stock to which you add the coupling of your choice to the outer ends. 
 

Even with passenger trains as small as on my own Nampara (4/6w brake third/comp/brake third) have a fixed component. What will my my coupling saga more interesting is the mixed gauge aspects, so the mixed gauge shunting truck (a copy  of the Exeter ‘converter’) will need two couplings at each end to cope with couplings being in the centre line of the BG and NG….

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

For your passenger stock would it be worth using the Bill Bedford (now sold by Eilleens Emporium I think) cast carriage couplings? These are designed so that they have representations of the screw shackles and the vac pipe connections. With non-corridors the lack of coupling the vac hoses is very noticeable, and there are above bufferbeam and below bufferbeam versions available...

 

Andy G

 

Edit: Interestingly I can't find them on Eilleens website at the minute.

Edited by uax6
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, drduncan said:

One option for coaching stock is to use the ex Bill Bedford cast brass couplings sold by Eileens emporium. These allow for fixed rakes of coaching stock to which you add the coupling of your choice to the outer ends. 
 

Even with passenger trains as small as on my own Nampara (4/6w brake third/comp/brake third) have a fixed component. What will my my coupling saga more interesting is the mixed gauge aspects, so the mixed gauge shunting truck (a copy  of the Exeter ‘converter’) will need two couplings at each end to cope with couplings being in the centre line of the BG and NG….

 

18 minutes ago, uax6 said:

For your passenger stock would it be worth using the Bill Bedford (now sold by Eilleens Emporium I think) cast carriage couplings? These are designed so that they have representations of the screw shackles and the vac pipe connections. With non-corridors the lack of coupling the vac hoses is very noticeable, and there are above bufferbeam and below bufferbeam versions available...

 

Andy G

 

Edit: Interestingly I can't find them on Eilleens website at the minute.

 

Just what I was looking for.

 

I'd heard such existed, but never managed to find any.

 

Have they gone the way of so much useful cottage industry stuff?

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Not sure if these are what is being referred to regarding the Bill Bedford couplings

 

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/coach_couplings.htm

 

Depending on how you intend to operate the layout you can mix and match coupling types.

 

For my own layout I have:

Rakes of coaches with the brassmaster fixed coupling.  The ends of each rake have a tension lock.

Rakes of wagons of various lengths with three link couplings and again a tension lock at each end.  Rakes can be coupled together to make a longer train, which can be broken down on set as required.

Brake vans and NPCS have tension locks at each end

locomotives have a wire goal post fitted as appropriate to accept the tension lock.  Tender locos are fitted at the rear only (presumed turning facilities off set).  Tank locos have a goal post at each end. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

I'm not immediately understanding why track gauge is decisive. What is the problem?

I've never used AJ couplings but I have read that, because there is a lot of 'slop' between the wheel flanges and the rail in 00 gauge, the couplings may not always line up correctly.

There is less slop with EM or P4 gauges.

 

A friend uses AJ couplings on a small shunting 7mm layout with quite sharp curves and they work most of the time.  If they fail to couple he just has another 'bash' and if they don't uncouple he just pushes one coupling down with a stick.

 

AJ and 3 link rely on using the buffers for pushing so buffer locking can be a problem.  

Rodney

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

Not sure if these are what is being referred to regarding the Bill Bedford couplings

 

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/coach_couplings.htm

 

Depending on how you intend to operate the layout you can mix and match coupling types.

 

For my own layout I have:

Rakes of coaches with the brassmaster fixed coupling.  The ends of each rake have a tension lock.

Rakes of wagons of various lengths with three link couplings and again a tension lock at each end.  Rakes can be coupled together to make a longer train, which can be broken down on set as required.

Brake vans and NPCS have tension locks at each end

locomotives have a wire goal post fitted as appropriate to accept the tension lock.  Tender locos are fitted at the rear only (presumed turning facilities off set).  Tank locos have a goal post at each end. 

 

They are the badgers, although the BB ones had two versions as I stated. These ones look very crisp, and looking at them you should be able to put vertical Vac standpipes onto them as well.

 

Andy G

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

Not sure if these are what is being referred to regarding the Bill Bedford couplings

 

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/coach_couplings.htm

 

Depending on how you intend to operate the layout you can mix and match coupling types.

 

For my own layout I have:

Rakes of coaches with the brassmaster fixed coupling.  The ends of each rake have a tension lock.

Rakes of wagons of various lengths with three link couplings and again a tension lock at each end.  Rakes can be coupled together to make a longer train, which can be broken down on set as required.

Brake vans and NPCS have tension locks at each end

locomotives have a wire goal post fitted as appropriate to accept the tension lock.  Tender locos are fitted at the rear only (presumed turning facilities off set).  Tank locos have a goal post at each end. 

 

28 minutes ago, uax6 said:

 

They are the badgers, although the BB ones had two versions as I stated. These ones look very crisp, and looking at them you should be able to put vertical Vac standpipes onto them as well.

 

Andy G

 

 

Thank you both.

 

Yes the vac pipe looks as if it may be long enough to lead from vertical stands.  If not, something could be fabricated.

 

Now, the set includes an optional steam heating pipe. Which begs the question, steam heating on the WNR?!? 

 

Now, if only they did the same for safety chains!

 

8 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

There was an etched version which Eileen's did but have now apparently lost the artwork.

 

Pete Harvey does something very similar, but I'm not sure whether he lists it.

 

PH Design?

 

I can't see any either.

 

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
spelling
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...