West Sands - BR (SR) Electrified south coast branch terminus - MISSING PHOTOS SLOWLY BEING RESTORED

[Geep7]

Managed to grab some time on Bank Holiday Monday to progress the baseboard extension. The backscene has now been finished, and the "footings" for the station building have been put in.

 

 

At the fiddle yard end, I have finished off the embankment extension, and blended it all in.

 

 

All it needs now is the fencing to be finished, and some weeds and bushes add to complete.

 

I've had a minor set-back with the platform surface, as I attached the plasticard to the balsa with impact adhesive, and, I suppose predictivly, the surface has bubbled up and lifted. So new surfaces will be added, and glued with PVA this time.

Edited July 2, 2018 by Geep7

[Geep7]

 

Well, it's official. The die-cut signs for West Sands were orderered last week and have turned up from Trackside Signs (no connection, just a happy customer), as pictured above.

 

Just need to find some time to crack on with the rest of the layout.

[Geep7]

On Saturday, I took advantage of the heatwave we're experiencing at the moment, to ballast the new trackwork on the baseboard extension. Working outdoors kept SWMBO happy, and also allowed the glue to dry very quickly. Not one of my favourite jobs to do on a layout, but actually found it quite pleasant this time, most likely due to the weather (or the IPA in the wetting spray.....).

 

Yesterday, I gave the tracks a quick blast of Humbrol 29, and those on the oil siding an additional go over with Railmatch sleep grime.

 

Will try and post some photos later....

[Nearholmer]

Reading a newly published book of diary extracts from the GM and one of the directors of the Southern Railway and noted something of potential interest: a plan in 1937 to create an empire flying boat base in Langstone Harbour, with city of Portsmouth pressing the SR to make sure that it was well-served by rail. The war, then progress in aircraft design, got in the way, of course.

[Geep7]

Reading a newly published book of diary extracts from the GM and one of the directors of the Southern Railway and noted something of potential interest: a plan in 1937 to create an empire flying boat base in Langstone Harbour, with city of Portsmouth pressing the SR to make sure that it was well-served by rail. The war, then progress in aircraft design, got in the way, of course.

Very interesting, I wonder if that would have tied in with the airfield on Thorney Island?

 

Of course, with all the flat land around the Selsey / Hayling Island area, it's conceivable that an airfield could have been built anywhere around there.

[Nearholmer]

I think it was a case of Portsmouth and Southampton vying to become the base for empire flying boats. Southampton won, but it was a fairly empty victory, because 'solid' airports nearer to London won overall.

[melmoth]

Reading a newly published book of diary extracts from the GM and one of the directors of the Southern Railway and noted something of potential interest: a plan in 1937 to create an empire flying boat base in Langstone Harbour, with city of Portsmouth pressing the SR to make sure that it was well-served by rail. The war, then progress in aircraft design, got in the way, of course.

 

What's the book?

[Nearholmer]

https://www.waterstones.com/book/gilbert-szlumper-and-leo-amery-of-the-southern-railway/john-king/9781473835276

 

Not one for the general railway enthusiasts, very much for those who are into corporate management. Good on szlumper’s work heading logistics during WW2.

[Geep7]

Been a while since i've done an update.

Not a huge amount of modelling on layout has been happening recently, the recent heatwave, holiday in Devon and needing to write and edit the REC exhibition show guide (along with the pressure of having a young child), have all contributed to not having much modelling time.

However, I came home from the holiday with a weathered Hornby 4-Vep courtesy of the model shop in Holsworthy. Now I know a lot has been written about these models, so I won't repeat them here, suffice to say, it generally looks like a Vep, but has areas of improvement.

First improvement was to the cab front. I've cut out and moved forward the corridor connection door. Picture below shows the comparison to the one I haven't done. Can you guess which is which?



I've also replaced the, frankly baffling, inside bearing wheels on the trailer bogies with proper pin-points and bearing cups. The motor bogie has had the traction tyres removed and new non-tyred wheels added. To aid adhesion i've added another 150g of weight to the driving coach, which has led me to remove the interior (to be honest, with the interior lights off you can hardly see it anyway, plus the motor bogie is visible in any case).
It now runs rather nicely, a looks better. Next improvements to do will be to replace the horns and roof vents with MJT items.
Below is a picture of the ends of all my 1963 style EMUS, left to right, MJT, 'Improved' Hornby, Hornby, Bachmann (4 TC)



I'll let you all decide which looks best....

As promised (better late than never), here is the result of the ballasting session.



It still needs some weathering, plus blending in across the baseboard join.

Hopefully, the next update will include some progress on the station building.

Until next time.....

Chris

Edited February 1, 2019 by Geep7

[Geep7]

So had a bit of spare time over the bank holiday weekend, and decided to crack on with something I've been mulling over for a while.

 

So the engineers siding at the front of the layout is now the goods siding. I've repositioned the loading dock, coal staithes (reduced to just 2 bunkers) and the provenders store. Hopefully it doesn't look too cramped.

 

 

The resulting hole left by the moving of the coal staithes has been filled.

 

 

The siding will now be used for stabling locos and brake vans. However I'm am undecided about a couple of things. Firstly, is whether there would be a fueling point here? Technically with the layout located in Selsey, it's not a massive distance from Fratton, so would locomotives just trip up the line to Fratton to fuel up?

The second is whether to add a second track in front to make an additional siding. Would it make things look too cramped?

Edited February 1, 2019 by Geep7

[Mike Storey]

So had a bit of spare time over the bank holiday weekend, and decided to crack on with something I've been mulling over for a while.

 

So the engineers siding at the front of the layout is now the goods siding. I've repositioned the loading dock, coal staithes (reduced to just 2 bunkers) and the provenders store. Hopefully it doesn't look too cramped.

 

20180827_132612.jpg

 

The resulting hole left by the moving of the coal staithes has been filled.

 

20180827_132658.jpg

 

The siding will now be used for stabling locos and brake vans. However I'm am undecided about a couple of things. Firstly, is whether there would be a fueling point here? Technically with the layout located in Selsey, it's not a massive distance from Fratton, so would locomotives just trip up the line to Fratton to fuel up?

The second is whether to add a second track in front to make an additional siding. Would it make things look too cramped?

 

As they say, less is often more, but it's your layout - do what will give you the most operating pleasure.

 

But, personally, I think the goods siding looks wrong. Perhaps the goods dock might be better located adjacent to the store (which would be logical for unloading vans), and the coal staithes at one end or the other?

[leopardml2341]

Sorry Chris,

 

May not be what you want to hear after doing the 'relocation' works, but Mike makes valid points in his post above.

 

That said, keep up the good work.

 

Rgds,

Andy

Edited August 28, 2018 by leopardml2341

[Geep7]

As they say, less is often more, but it's your layout - do what will give you the most operating pleasure.

 

But, personally, I think the goods siding looks wrong. Perhaps the goods dock might be better located adjacent to the store (which would be logical for unloading vans), and the coal staithes at one end or the other?

Now you say it, and I look at it, it would make more sense for the loading dock to be near the store, with a gap between for a lorry to fit, and the coal staithes at the buffer stop end.

I have, stupidly, glued them down already, but they should come back up OK..... fingers crossed. They have already been moved once, after all......

[Mike Storey]

Now you say it, and I look at it, it would make more sense for the loading dock to be near the store, with a gap between for a lorry to fit, and the coal staithes at the buffer stop end.

I have, stupidly, glued them down already, but they should come back up OK..... fingers crossed. They have already been moved once, after all......

 

That is a possibility, but I would have thought it more logical for the store to be adjacent to the dock so that sacks/pallets/boxes can be moved easily from one to the other if collection or delivery is not immediate? Lorries could collect/deliver from the other end of the store, and large items would be lifted on/off the dock itself?

[Geep7]

Sorry Chris,

 

May not be what you want to hear after doing the 'relocation' works, but Mike makes valid points in his post above mone.

Rgds,

Andy

Actually far from it, this is one of the reasons I love sharing my work on here.

 

It's good to have mistakes pointed out, and learn from them. I have no worries about criticism, as long as it's constructive.

 

I'll have a look at moving them around this evening if I have time.

 

Cheers, Chris

[Geep7]

That is a possibility, but I would have thought it more logical for the store to be adjacent to the dock so that sacks/pallets/boxes can be moved easily from one to the other if collection or delivery is not immediate? Lorries could collect/deliver from the other end of the store, and large items would be lifted on/off the dock itself?

OK, so I think you're suggesting it goes, loading dock, store, coal staithes, from left to right?

[Rivercider]

Regarding the question about whether to add a fuelling point or not, I would just leave it as a stabling point only. 

If EMUs stable overnight they obviously don't need fuel. As you say Fratton is not far away to fuel any diesel visitors.

Local freight trips would come from Eastleigh(?) where the loco would have been fuelled before work.

 

cheers

Edited August 28, 2018 by Rivercider

[Geep7]

Regarding the question about whether to add a fuelling point or not, I would just leave it as a stabling point only.

If EMUs stable overnight they obviously don't need fuel. As you say Fratton is not far away to fuel any diesel visitors.

Local freight trips would come from Eastleigh(?) where the loco would have been fuelled before work.

 

cheers

Thanks, I do have a 350hp shunter (Class 08) which would do a bit of shunting and hang around the station most if the time, but I guess that would run back once or twice a week to Fratton to get fuelled.

 

I think I might leave it as a single track stabling point, with maybe a small mess hut of some sort for the drivers to at least have a cuppa.

[Rivercider]

Thanks, I do have a 350hp shunter (Class 08) which would do a bit of shunting and hang around the station most if the time, but I guess that would run back once or twice a week to Fratton to get fuelled.

 

I think I might leave it as a single track stabling point, with maybe a small mess hut of some sort for the drivers to at least have a cuppa.

That sounds reasonable, the 350hp shunter would stable between shunts outside the cabin leaving a nice oily mess where it usually stands,

perhaps going back to Fratton for the weekend. 

Edit - and the crew of the freight trip, or loco that brings the oil tanks in will be glad of that cuppa too!

 

Does West Sands receive any inter regional trains on summer saturdays, perhaps just a portion of a train that splits for elsewhere? You might get something else stabled for a few hours.

 

cheers 

Edited August 28, 2018 by Rivercider

[leopardml2341]

.......receive any inter regional trains on summer saturdays, perhaps just a portion of a train that splits for elsewhere? You might get something else stabled for a few hours.

 

cheers

 

That's the premise on my layout, loosely based on Swanage. I've even managed to find an excuse for a Summer FO portion of an overnight motorail/sleeper service

 

Loco, (MK1) BCK, SLC, SLSTP and 2 motorail flats.

Edited August 28, 2018 by leopardml2341

[Mike Storey]

OK, so I think you're suggesting it goes, loading dock, store, coal staithes, from left to right?

 

Or right to left!! Only you will know what looks right as you try it out, which may depend on what looks best for road access to each. In practice, I would have assumed coal wagons would have hung around longer than vans, so coal at the stops end would seem right, to avoid unnecessary extra shunts, but any scenario is possible (as coal staithes were rarely on the same siding as general goods, but no matter- you have evolved a solution which saves space, just as any railway company would have done, and I am sure did, at a number of locations.).

[Geep7]

Yes, I have an inter regional set, 4 or 5 coach set. Currently have (Mk1) 3 SK's, 1 x BCK and 1 x FO for that, normally hauled by a Class 47 or Hymek.

 

I also have a pull/push 33/1 + 4-TC set doing a West Sands to Salisbury/Bristol service. I would assume though that the 33 off that would stay attached on lay-over....

[Geep7]

Ok, ignoring the fact that the coal staithes shouldn't really be on the same track, space is at a premium, which of the following looks the best or more plausible?

 

A:

 

B:

 

or C:

 

Would be grateful of any other suggestions, except for adding any more track.

 

Cheers, Chris

[leopardml2341]

Chris,

 

Do you 'have' to have the coal staithes?

 

For me they just look out of place. Those excepted, I'd go with option ©.

 

Perhaps some caged propane cylinders (and/or a small collection of PW materials) may look better?

Edited August 28, 2018 by leopardml2341

[5BarVT]

My optician always asks ‘A or B’ and I usually can’t tell the difference, I’m even more stuck when it’s A, B or C!

So, I would go for option D, which is C with the coal statues moved further from the loading dock because they don’t look right that close together.

Paul.