Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Biggles Dog said:

Thanks for the encouraging comments. I'm finding that what is available these days somewhat bewildering, having returned after a huge gap, and rather lacking in confidence. I take something out of its box,look at it, think 'I can't do that, so put it back. Silly really, as if I try and don't succeed I haven't really lost anything. I am thinking of doing a through station, single line, with a branch added for extra interest/operation, about 14 points in all. Set on a fictitious line across Bodmin Moor from Launceston to Bodmin.

Hi Geoff

 

Sounds like exactly where I was and how I was feeling back in 2012.  I've still got one or two items I bought then, opened to examine, took fright and stuck back in a drawer, just as you describe.  But many others I eventually got round to making a fist of, as skill and confidence grew.  Re your specific questions:

1.Martin Wynne has already answered the one on 00-SF (or 4-sf as he now prefers to call it, for reasons I entirely understand but haven't quite got used to!)  Martin is the go-to authority on the subject, as its progenitor and champion.    

2. The dense foam underlay covers all the bits of baseboard that have track on them, so you're right, it's not chamfered in line with the cork. (I'd thought the combination of cork and foam, total depth about 5 cm, would give good sound insulation.  It doesn't, or not much, but I then found I rather liked the rumbling of the trains anyway.)

3. The backscene does drop just a little bit below track level behind the embankment (see my last post above, second pic of the pannier) but most of the background in that area is covered with trees.

 

Cheers,

John.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, checkrail said:

Martin is the go-to authority on the subject, as its progenitor and champion.

 

 

Hi John,

 

It was actually invented by Roy Miller of the EMGS about 50 years ago, and was used by a few modellers in the 1970s and 80s. My only contribution was to give it the name 00-SF for use in Templot. I was later badgered into removing the 00 reference by those who said 00 could mean only 16.5mm. I was being a bit feeble-brained there and should have stood my ground (bearing in mind that 00 trains run on it). However we are where we are. The important thing is the result, not the name. You have shown how well it looks and works.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s a better name, Martin. One could argue that 00 means ‘4mm to the foot scale model railways using less than 18.83mm to represent standard (56.5”) track gauge’ as a broad term, but that would lead to confusion and would upset a lot of EM modellers. 00 has come to mean 16.5mm gauge track with 4mm scale models, to a plethora of possible standards re Frances, flangeways and B2B. The fact that 4-SF accommodates 00 models (as long as the back to back is sufficient) shows how much excess slop there is in standard 00. The result, despite being about a scale inch less than 00 on the track gauge, is as you say, a big improvement.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, checkrail said:

A short break from coaches - but they'll be back!  Here's 8750 class pannier 3603 with Newton Abbot brake van 36560.  

Pannier_2.jpg.3811abf94c0ed02449d07143a4fd9a1d.jpgThe Oxford Rail AA3 Toad has had surgery involving new ends to make it look like a ...  er, like an AA3 Toad.  OR are a very welcome addition to the RTR market but they need to raise their game a bit in the research department.

 

I found a new camera angle for this second shot, on the up platform end ramp just in front of the water crane.  Those hooks on the bunker might be crying out for a fire iron or two.

 

 

John C.

 

I have that Modelu guard too. It slightly troubles me that he looks extraordinarily well fed for the 1930s, but maybe he has a stash of pies in his van.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, martin_wynne said:

It was actually invented by Roy Miller of the EMGS about 50 years ago

Ok, credit where it's due!  Thanks for that clarification Martin.  I was going by a memory of something you once wrote about your 85a days, narrowing the gauge through crossings - maybe I mis-remembered!

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
15 hours ago, Nick Gough said:

Definitely looking as uniform as the average GWR train! :D

Yes, just the look I've been after since the start.  It's as if they had a rule stating," No coach shall ever be marshalled next to a similar one"

  • Like 5
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, checkrail said:

Ok, credit where it's due!  Thanks for that clarification Martin.  I was going by a memory of something you once wrote about your 85a days, narrowing the gauge through crossings - maybe I mis-remembered!

 

Hi John,

 

You didn't mis-remember. smile.gif  I did indeed use 16.2mm gauge for my 00 gauge products in the 70s and 80s, but only after Roy Miller told me about it, and asked me to make up a sample crossover.

 

But it wasn't called 00-SF then. Roy called it "EM minus 2", I just called it "Scale 00" without mentioning the actual track gauge (the alternative then being Universal 00 / RTR):

 

9780900586088-uk-300.jpg
linked from: https://pictures.abebooks.com/isbn/9780900586088-uk-300.jpg  

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Was nice to see the old 'Starting in scale 00' book Martin.  Took me back to the days of BRMSB v. 'Universal' standards, those seminal layouts from the days before much or any quality RTR, and the pontifications of the great CJF!

 

Here's mine, a slightly earlier edition from pre-decimal days, with Max Pyrke's influential Berrow Branch on the cover.  At a guess I'd say that yours features P D Hancock's Craig & Mertonford? 

P1060339.JPG.a4e633c0f93a38c91468964150827201.JPG

 

I still find the standards chart inside the back cover a useful reference on occasion.

P1060340.JPG.033bcac61b291a317b894ecf71d013fb.JPG

 

 

 

John C.

  • Like 7
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, checkrail said:

I've mentioned before that I find the Slaters kits a bit over-engineered for my modest skills. 

 

It's not your skills that are modest, you are. I wish I could produce coaches as well finished as you have.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, checkrail said:

Another simplification I carried out this time was to the compartment partitions.  When installed as intended, engaging with both sides and with the corridor partition, they provide a very strong shell.  I couldn't quite manage it, and I remember on my first one having a job to get the roof to fit over them properly.  Trimming them in situ wasn't easy either.  So on this occasion I cut the partitions straight across the top at cantrail level, but just before sticking the roof on I added some struts of stout Plastikard across the width of the coach, just where the door ventilators sit, to give the required lateral stability. 

That sounds interesting John. I was thinking of making a complete false ceiling but I might give this a try instead.

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Just been reading about an E set than ran from Exeter to Plymouth John. The consist was three coaches that changed about 1938 involving an all third, brake third and composite.

  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
46 minutes ago, gwrrob said:

Just been reading about an E set than ran from Exeter to Plymouth John. The consist was three coaches that changed about 1938 involving an all third, brake third and composite.

Yes, I've read about the 3 coach E-sets too. Think there's a pic of one in Beck & Copsey? That would make another nice train (if I had the time and the storage space!)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a most excellent set of coaches John. Anyone with either volume of the GWR in the thirties would recognise that as being true to prototype. Ace.

 

best wishes,

 

Alastair 

  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, checkrail said:

Some of you were interested in my use of Keen Systems gangways with floating end plates, cut from their replacement ends for Hornby clerestories, on my recent toplight build.  So just before we leave the M-set here are a few details, starting with a close-up picture.

 

I just happened to have a couple of these ends hanging about spare, so cut the gangway parts off to use on the E88. But at £10.50 per pair this is not the cheapest way to go about it.  Looking at Keen Systems' website I now see they do a scissors gangway for some RTR LMS coaches.  They look to be of similar profile and would cut the cost by over 50%. 

 

When I've used the clerestory ends in the past I've carefully avoided butting them up together, assuming that without the Keen expanding close-coupling system they would derail on tight bends.  So I only ever coupled them up to vehicles with folded paper gangways.  But with the E88 intended to fit in the train between two clerestories I decided to experiment.  I really thought I was pushing my luck, but after a bit of adjustment to my crude hook & bar couplings I was delighted to discover that it worked.  Have a look at this video of the train running through the fiddle yard, sashaying over the inner radius of five Peco curved points and a couple of little reverse curves.  Very pleased with this result, and what a good excuse (besides cowardice) for giving the construction of those Slater's gangways a swerve!

 

John C.

Thanks John. I enjoyed that, not just because of hte gangways but also because I love seeing behind the scenes and what people get up to in their fiddle yards.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Even the fiddle yard is impeccable! 
 

The carriages swaying through the points was a sight to see, the Keen system obviously works very well.

 

Your neat fiddle yard though puts my random selection of track to shame! 
 

Excellent work John, thanks for showing us. 
 

Regards, Neal.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi John,

Thanks first to Neal for the encouragement. I will dig out something old, like me, and have a bash.

Secondly, thanks to Martin for pointing me in the right direction on 00FS - I've downlaoded the details and sent off to C&L for the gauges.

Thanks also to you, John, for answereing the questions on underlay and backdrop.I'll continue to work through all the other information on the site and hopefully not take fright !

I think I might try a small layout first, to get back into the feel of things, before tackling my 24'-0" x 2'-6" project - on the other hand, as I'm 78 tomorrow it might just be best to crack on with the main layout now.

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, checkrail said:

Don't think this one's in L T C Rolt's "Red for danger".

Crash_1.jpg.0ab2a8a972e3bb751a3dee8a512ec98f.jpg

 

Seems that vibrations from the bathroom rebuild going on below had made the fire-devil from the down platform water crane fall onto the track.  I was looking the other way, driving an up express out of the fiddle yard when I heard the crash behind me.

 

Fortunately the signalman was able to slam on the up home signal to stop a King from ploughing into the wreckage.

Crash_2.jpg.eb3f43403fddad8b5ee276cd071c565a.jpg

 

No harm done, I'm glad to say.  But still a lot of dust to get rid of.

 

John C.

This is really not what you want, John. How much longer have you got to put up with the builders below? Do they know about the work of art they are disturbing above them?

I hope it’s not long and you can clean everything up soon!

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
  • Friendly/supportive 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
×
×
  • 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.