Producing your own track

[BG John]

I'm afraid I don't use filing jigs and other clever stuff. I just attack bits of rail with a file until it seems right. Then I try it on the template, and if it won't fit I file it some more until it does. Then I solder it onto the copperclad sleepers using the template and gauges as appropriate. Before the days of Templot, I made mixed gauge pointwork with just a few guide lines and trial and error. Everything I've built so far has worked nicely. That may be due to luck, or having a magic touch, but it works for me! One of these days I'll move on to super detailed highly prototypical track, and then things may (or may not) be done differently.

[hayfield]

John

 

The jigs just make things a bit quicker and perhaps simpler, with the copperclad method you do not need to pre-make the common crossings, but as you say its easy enough to simply file by hand and eye matching up the angle to either a plan or simple home made cardboard Vee patten

Edited August 23, 2016 by hayfield

[6029 King Stephen]

Thanks for the tip on the long Peco pins - I will get some when back in UK.

 

Re the filing jigs, I have two; one has 1:5, 1:6, 1:7 and 1:8 and the other has 1:9, 1:10, 1:11 and 1:12.  These jigs are suitable for filing the rails that you use for the Vee and can also be used for forming the rails that lead the wheel from the point blade and through the Vee (I forget what these are actually called!).  I don't have filing jigs for the point blades but just run them lengthways across the course and then smooth wheels on my bench top grinder until they are thinner at one end than the other and have the foot and top of the rail tapered.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

[6029 King Stephen]

In the Right Track 10 DVD, Norman Solomon demonstrates how he uses plasticard to build a quick jig for the 1:Whatever and then uses ample liquid flux and a quick in and out with a hot soldering iron to make the vee without melting his jig.  I haven't tried this myself yet but have considered making some similar with some thin wood pieces.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

Edited August 23, 2016 by 6029 King Stephen

[Derekstuart]

The rail you are thinking of is the wing rail. Only one thing to remember that these are curved rather than an angle. I find the best way is to bend them around something approaching the right radius (I use the bottom lip of a Humbrol thinners tin) and then adjust them on the jig.

 

As for blades, I found the Howard Bolton method very good (I don't know if he invented it or just copied it). Clamp two pieces of rail at X from the rail tip and use the top of the clamp as a guide for the file. By changing the distance of X you can file all the prototype blade angles.

 

Sorry if I'm telling you what you already know. Other people might (but probably not) find a use for it. It's not that long ago that I was reading every post trying to find alternative methods.

Thanks for the tip on the long Peco pins - I will get some when back in UK.

 

Re the filing jigs, I have two; one has 1:5, 1:6, 1:7 and 1:8 and the other has 1:9, 1:10, 1:11 and 1:12.  These jigs are suitable for filing the rails that you use for the Vee and can also be used for forming the rails that lead the wheel from the point blade and through the Vee (I forget what these are actually called!).  I don't have filing jigs for the point blades but just run them lengthways across the course and then smooth wheels on my bench top grinder until they are thinner at one end than the other and have the foot and top of the rail tapered.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

 

 

Sorry, I should have said that I haven't seen the EMGS one but have actually heard it is machined well. I have two. One is the 9-12 jig originally from Portsdown Models and engineered incredibly well- the chap was obviously a skilled engineer. The other one is 5-8 and supplied by another 'finescale' organisation and I regret to say it is a little disappointing. It is fine for filing the vee ends, but as the grooves are 1.1mm compared to the 0.9mm of most rail, they have enough slop in them to make them poor to hold the rail for filing. My opinion only- others are available. They are good for filing the vee tips though.

I have just checked as I did not remember any slop. The EMGS jig and rail are a nice snug fit. Did I read somewhere on here that one of the makes of rail is a mite narrow?

 

I've seen some of your stuff, John. That single slip you recently built- or is it a barry slip? Is really a piece of art.

I'm afraid I don't use filing jigs and other clever stuff. I just attack bits of rail with a file until it seems right. Then I try it on the template, and if it won't fit I file it some more until it does. Then I solder it onto the copperclad sleepers using the template and gauges as appropriate. Before the days of Templot, I made mixed gauge pointwork with just a few guide lines and trial and error. Everything I've built so far has worked nicely. That may be due to luck, or having a magic touch, but it works for me! One of these days I'll move on to super detailed highly prototypical track, and then things may (or may not) be done differently.

[BG John]

I've seen some of your stuff, John. That single slip you recently built- or is it a barry slip? Is really a piece of art.

I thought it was going to be a Barry slip, until I started planning it. According to Martin Wynne it's just a single slip, but not of the kind normal used my modellers. I hope it's not just a piece of art, but until I get it connected up I can't be sure it will work properly. If it doesn't maybe I'll frame it and hang it on the wall!

[Derekstuart]

Hmmm. I wonder when a single slip becomes a barry slip. I must look again.

 

I looked at your Walkley Yard layout as I thought it quite an inspired design- something that could put a lot into a fairly small space and still make it seem well spaced out. In the end though I decided to copy a real location (or in the case of this one I have started, a non-existent station on a real line).

 

I think Walkley Yard is a design that will be talked about a lot in the future.

I thought it was going to be a Barry slip, until I started planning it. According to Martin Wynne it's just a single slip, but not of the kind normal used my modellers. I hope it's not just a piece of art, but until I get it connected up I can't be sure it will work properly. If it doesn't maybe I'll frame it and hang it on the wall!

[BG John]

Hmmm. I wonder when a single slip becomes a barry slip. I must look again.

 

I looked at your Walkley Yard layout as I thought it quite an inspired design- something that could put a lot into a fairly small space and still make it seem well spaced out. In the end though I decided to copy a real location (or in the case of this one I have started, a non-existent station on a real line).

 

I think Walkley Yard is a design that will be talked about a lot in the future.

It's got a much bigger capacity than a standard Inglenook, but could be operated in a similar way. I'm planning to use the tunnel and loco shed to disrupt shunting , to add a bit of extra interest. It's a nice modelling project anyway.

[hayfield]

Hmmm. I wonder when a single slip becomes a barry slip. I must look again.

 

I looked at your Walkley Yard layout as I thought it quite an inspired design- something that could put a lot into a fairly small space and still make it seem well spaced out. In the end though I decided to copy a real location (or in the case of this one I have started, a non-existent station on a real line).

 

I think Walkley Yard is a design that will be talked about a lot in the future.

 

Derek

 

I think a Barry slip slips both ways but only crosses one way.

 

http://85a.co.uk/forum/gallery/2/original/2_130910_590000000.jpg

[hayfield]

Back to the hardened steel jigs, they are a nice to have but not a necessary to have

 

When I was growing up, building your own turnouts was mostly for cost reasons, though there were modellers wanting something better/different from RTR. All jigs were hand made, also there were engineers about who could knock up the odd item. Basic tools were used and improvisation was the order of the day

 

Certainly there were plenty of home made building aids, again made from whatever was to hand. At school we were taught to both cut and file to a pattern, accuracy being more important than speed. If it was not good enough we had to do it again

 

What has this got to do with hardened steel jigs, well perfectly good parts are made without them, just takes a bit longer or home made jigs or patterns are used. For a club or someone who makes a few items the £80 may seem a sound investment with pre-made Vees at £15 and material used pence and of course there is a ready market for these on a well known auction site when you are finished with them, as they are not commonly available to all. Or in fact an opportunity for an engineer to make and sell a few.

 

I would always suggest to have a go without them at first, and or make a simple pattern or jig of your own, a Vee jig out of thick card being the easiest and cheapest

[martin_wynne]

I think a Barry slip slips both ways but only crosses one way.

 

http://85a.co.uk/forum/gallery/2/original/2_130910_590000000.jpg

 

Barry slip is so-called because of their use in the sorting sidings at Barry Docks and other South Wales docks.

 

Here is a ladder of Barry slips at Tredegar Park Sidings, Alexandra Docks:

 

Many thanks to Sandy Croall for the pic.

 

Martin.

[Derekstuart]

Thanks for the timely reminder John/Martin.

 

The big difference being that regardless of any switching a s/slip can default into a simple diamond whereas a Barry slip cannot. Is that about it?

 

I should have thought of that...

[martin_wynne]

Hi Derek,

 

A Barry slip is simply two opposing turnouts, like this:

 

 

But overlapped to save space. It doesn't add any extra functionality.

 

There is no requirement that the diverging tracks should be in line, or the same angle, or that the two V-crossings should be any specific distance apart. Consequently it isn't any kind of diamond-crossing.

 

For example this Barry slip is comprised of B-8 and A-5 turnouts:

 

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[BG John]

But try overlapping two turnouts that turn off the same side of the straight line (a left and right, rather than two lefts or two rights), and it becomes a single slip. That's what confused me when I thought I would be making a Barry slip.

[martin_wynne]

But try overlapping two turnouts that turn off the same side of the straight line (a left and right, rather than two lefts or two rights), and it becomes a single slip. That's what confused me when I thought I would be making a Barry slip.

 

And depending where the switches lie in relation to the diamond, you might get:

 

1. an outside slip, or

 

2. an ordinary inside slip, or

 

3. a half-scissors:

 

 

Although in the first two it's likely that the hand of the switches would be reversed from a conventional slip, making the straight slip road the through route. In that case there is no underlying diamond-crossing, so whether it should still be called a slip is moot. But if not I don't know what else it would be called. Prototype switches and crossings can be combined to create many formations which don't have a specific name.

 

No. 1 might be called an offset half-scissors rather than an outside slip. Here is an example of a full offset scissors:

 

 

Photos ©Public Domain

 

Bishops Stortford Loco. Thanks to Adrian Marks for the pics.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Edited August 24, 2016 by martin_wynne

[BG John]

And depending where the switches lie in relation to the diamond, you might get:

 

1. an outside slip, or

 

2. an ordinary inside slip, or

 

3. a half-scissors:

 

not_barry.png

 

Although in the first two it's likely that the hand of the switches would be reversed from a conventional slip, making the straight slip road the through route. In that case there is no underlying diamond-crossing, so whether it should still be called a slip is moot. But if not I don't know what else it would be called. Prototype switches and crossings can be combined to create many formations which don't have a specific name.

 

No. 1 might be called an offset half-scissors rather than an outside slip. Here is an example of a full offset scissors:

 

 

The one I've made in EM is No 2 in your diagram, and you said you thought it was a slip of some sort.

 

I've also got a plan to turn two Peco OO points and a short diamond crossing into a kind of No 3 for my O-16.5 layout, although it uses two right hand turnouts!

[Derekstuart]

Martin

 

To produce No1 in Templot is that a case of overlaying 2 separate turnouts as you would for a Barry slip? I did try producing No1 with a straight edge using the diamond tool and couldn't do it. Mind you, I didn't really realise what I was looking at the time. Not that I ever planned to build such a monster for real but I made Kings Cross circa 1970s in Templot (until computer died..) and that was the one bit that I was never really happy with.

 

PS after 2 years of reseach, transporting a 1970s photo of Whitby that "featured a single slip" onto a much larger screen showed that it was in fact a Barry slip. It is very easy for us mere mortals to confuse the two if not looking properly. Had I not looked on a large monitor I doubt even now I'd know what it was.

[martin_wynne]

Martin

 

To produce No1 in Templot is that a case of overlaying 2 separate turnouts as you would for a Barry slip?

 

Hi Derek,

 

Yes or no. It depends what you are trying to achieve. Almost always the starting point is to decide which is the through road, in other words which is the running line over which traffic would not expect to see a speed restriction?

 

Having decided that, you can then build up your formation by inserting the switches and turnouts into it and diverging from it. Because of the switch deflection angle these routes always have a slower speed restriction. In yards and sidings speed isn't a consideration, but the geometry is the same.

 

In a slip the usual starting point is a diamond crossing, with one of the roads as the through road. The slip roads then diverge from that, linking to the diagonal road. Such a slip can be curved, so that the slip road becomes almost straight, but still contains the switch deflections. In Templot such a slip would be created in the same way as any other slip, starting with the diamond-crossing.

 

On the other hand if the slip road becomes the through road, with the hand of the switches reversed, it perhaps should no longer be called a "slip" formation. But I don't know of any other name for 2. above. Certainly in Templot you would approach it differently from a slip, starting with the through road and inserting turnouts in it.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[BG John]

I'm afraid I cheated with mine. I overlaid two turnouts, printed it out, and drew in the complicated bits by hand. I haven't worked out how to move sleepers around yet either, so printed it without sleepers and drew them in by hand too. My aim was to produce a model railway type creation, not a model of the prototype though, to suit my retro layout!

[Derekstuart]

John

Moving sleepers about is easy. Use real>>shove timbers. Play with buttons and watch what they do. You can add, remove, make narrow, wide, lengthen shorten.

 

 

Martin

Thanks. I think it is a case of studying the picture of the chosen prototype more and then deciding. The particular one that I am looking at (Whitby) is certainly a case of two RH turnouts super-imposed.

 

Truly fascinating subject. Just as you think you know enough to start construction up pops another set of facts. I think it's time to purchase some Peco set-track.

[martin_wynne]

Moving sleepers about is easy. Use real>>shove timbers. Play with buttons and watch what they do. You can add, remove, make narrow, wide, lengthen shorten.

 

The only thing which might not be self-evident is that to select a timber for shoving you click on its number, not on the timber itself. If you remove (omit) a timber, its number remains visible so that you can click on it to get the timber back.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

John

Moving sleepers about is easy. Use real>>shove timbers. Play with buttons and watch what they do. You can add, remove, make narrow, wide, lengthen shorten.

 

 

Martin

Thanks. I think it is a case of studying the picture of the chosen prototype more and then deciding. The particular one that I am looking at (Whitby) is certainly a case of two RH turnouts super-imposed.

 

Truly fascinating subject. Just as you think you know enough to start construction up pops another set of facts. I think it's time to purchase some Peco set-track.

 

Derek

 

I have trouble adding sleepers, they seem to go where I don't want them to go, I do like adding and taking away rails though.

 

Pegs on the other hand flumox me, just when I think I have grasped the idea it all goes wrong.

 

Still the great thing about Templot is its versatility, in that users of all understanding levels can each get something from it.

[Torper]

Once I mastered the concept I had no problems with sleepers, which was just as well as I was making a number of interlaced points.  I did once think that I had got to grips with pegs, but then I found I hadn't.....

 

DT

[Derekstuart]

I've found the pegs to be quite simple, except that I can't remember which name/button is which part of the template and often have to press each CTRL+number until I get it where I want. But that ability to use pegs to align partial templates is probably the most important feature in Templot, in my opinion.

 

 

When I first started with Templot I was trying to design a very specific tandem, formerly located at Whitby. I wanted to get it just right as this was the item that everything else was measured from. The general consensus was it was a B6/B8. However, over time I put countless permutations into Templot, making one part exactly as I could see in the photo and then seeing if another part of the template matched other photos. Eventually I found a photo that showed without doubt it was a B and a C. So I put that into Templot, offset the correct number of timbers as in the photo and kep changing the vee sizes until I found that the finished template on screen exactly matched every single photo I had. It turned out to be a B7 and a C9. Every timber matches in Templot and the photo at every part of it.

 

The point to that story? There is not a snowball in hades chance that I could have accurately worked that out using anything other than Templot.

 

 

In terms of people learning Templot, I have helped a couple of people here with it over the phone "click that, what do you see" and one person who lives local I went round with my laptop and showed it. But it is hard to explain it over the internet.

[martin_wynne]

The point to that story? There is not a snowball in hades chance that I could have accurately worked that out using anything other than Templot.

 

In terms of people learning Templot, I have helped a couple of people here with it over the phone "click that, what do you see" and one person who lives local I went round with my laptop and showed it. But it is hard to explain it over the internet.

 

Hi Derek,

 

I'm glad you found Templot useful, and thanks for helping other users.

 

When I first released it 17 years ago, I expected there to be maybe a couple of hundred users at most. It was intended for modellers in a similar position to me and my friends -- those who had been building track for some time, mostly in EM* gauge, and who had at least a basic understanding of prototype track and terminology. It was intended to be a useful tool for those who already knew what they were doing.

 

But over the years the Templot user base has changed. Nowadays when I release a program update, it gets several thousand downloads, from all over the world. Many of those are modellers wanting to learn about track and maybe start building track for the first time, often in 00 gauge.

 

So the style and layout of Templot, and especially the documentation, needs to change to suit the new user base. But I am now retired, with other interests and hobbies competing for my time, and nowadays it is not good for my health to spend hours every day sitting at the computer. So my single-handed resources to provide support for Templot users and to further develop the program are limited.

 

But I have made the barest of starts on a new video-based beginners guide, called "Templot Explained", which I hope to continue over the next few months. It will be a long time before it covers everything in Templot, but hopefully it won't be too long before it covers most of the basics. You can find it at:

 

 http://templot.com/companion/templot_explained.html

 

It is designed to run equally well on mobile devices and tablet computers, so that it can be viewed while Templot is running on your main computer.

 

I would appreciate some feedback on whether I am hitting the right level of explanation, from the right starting place, and how well it runs on various devices. Being only human, feedback does affect my motivation to continue, and so far there has been very little.

 

*when I was manufacturing pointwork kits and components in the 1970s, EM gauge outsold 00 and P4 by a considerable margin.

 

regards,

 

Martin.