Aberaeron Station

[Les le Breton]

Hi everyone, since my wife has beaten my modelling by the posting of her knitted Locomotive & carriages, it’s about time I sought some advice from the BRM  Forum see:-

 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/114846-my-wife-has-joined-in-my-modelling/

My proposed layout of the Aberaeron terminus, [anglicised by the GWR as Aberayron,] to be built as an imaginary scenario modelling the years following the grouping of railway companies on 1^st January 1923, with some modellers license to increase interest!

• I have developed a track plan which blends some of the real arrangements that were built at Aberaeron over many years
• The station buildings could have been improved by the GWR immediately after WW1 because Aberaeron could have morphed into becoming a popular holiday destination for factory workers, Sunday school outings etc.;
• The GWR persuaded the fishermen to allow the extension to Port Aberaeron just before WW1; this enhanced the fishing industry and the GWR receipts. The simple freight extension continued the down, (station platform) track through the goods access road, protected by a level crossing gate. [This will give me the opportunity to extend the layout in the future, either with more scenery or another fiddle yard];
• I would imagine that the GWR would have to increase the loading capacity of the route’s infrastructure to cope with the more intensive use of the branch, bigger engines? [Yes please!]
• Limitations of space in my garage, has forced a shortening of many tracks, but hopefully maintaining the atmosphere of the location. Similarly I have been forced to keep the principal routes straight to enable the essential track plans to work;
• I will assume that the original signal box would be replaced by a superior, later GWR type because of the increased traffic. Its’ position would be retained at the station throat to enable the signalman to control all the sidings etc.;
• A senior porter would be in charge of the level crossing waving his red and green flags, allowing train access to the  harbour; [thanks for the idea Richard];
•  The extension down to the harbour could create exit stage right through the sky! I propose a row of terraced houses would act as a [fairly] neat camouflage for this exit, The Feathers arms on the opposite side of the track would likewise complete the camouflage;
• I hope that the engine shed has the same, camouflage for the exit through the scenery as the stock enters and departs the scenic board and the fiddle yard.

The attached plan has the proposed fiddle yard on the LHS and a possible extension to the harbour on the RHS. Any advice or help would be gratefully appreciated.

 

 

Edited October 23, 2016 by Les le Breton

[charliez43]

It looks like you are to a good start. Charlie  

[Edwardian]

Looks like a good plan and I look forward to developments.

 

You mention the signal box dating from after WW1.  GW signal boxes, even in the '20s, weren't exactly Bauhaus.  The hipped roof examples (see Prototype kit (Ratio does a plastic one)) were built well into the '20s and there was gable roofed version too. See Astrop (1907) and Green Lane (1925) on this site, which might give you a start: http://www.signalbox.org/gallery/gw.htm

[Les le Breton]

Looks like a good plan and I look forward to developments.

 

You mention the signal box dating from after WW1.  GW signal boxes, even in the '20s, weren't exactly Bauhaus.  The hipped roof examples (see Prototype kit (Ratio does a plastic one)) were built well into the '20s and there was gable roofed version too. See Astrop (1907) and Green Lane (1925) on this site, which might give you a start: http://www.signalbox.org/gallery/gw.htm

Thanks Edwardian, I am trying to create a might have happened layout. I have discovered a very early picture of Aberaeron which has led me to think about using the Ratio or Metcalfe signal box.

 

 

I appreciate the advice Edwardian

[Edwardian]

Thanks Edwardian, I am trying to create a might have happened layout. I have discovered a very early picture of Aberaeron which has led me to think about using the Ratio or Metcalfe signal box.

 

1912 Aberayron station throat.jpg

 

I appreciate the advice Edwardian

 

This, then:

[Les le Breton]

This, then:

Thanks again Edwardian, spot on, I hadn't seen this fascinating photo before. Whether I scratch build the original, or stick to the aforementioned kits is a dilemma.

My next move is to build the baseboards however.

[Les le Breton]

It looks like you are to a good start. Charlie  

Thanks for your positive support Charlie. I've just managed to create a mock up of a front view of the layout, not including the fiddlers' yard or the right hand dock scene, I hope it makes sense!

[two tone green]

50 miles up the road from me. Lovely place. Will be watching with great interest.

[rovex]

This, then:

Has the look of the top half of the ratio model of highley signal box

[flyingsignalman]

Looking at your diagram, I can't see any need to alter the original signal box as the layout hasn't been altered substantially. The new extension to the harbour could have been controlled from a Ground Frame at that end of the station.

Perhaps if a new Bay line had been added then the expense of a new box would be justified; otherwise the owning company would be loathe to spend money if it didn't need to.

Here's a couple of shots of the original cabin (now at the Gwilli Railway), taken 21/7/2016.

[Les le Breton]

Looking at your diagram, I can't see any need to alter the original signal box as the layout hasn't been altered substantially. The new extension to the harbour could have been controlled from a Ground Frame at that end of the station.

Perhaps if a new Bay line had been added then the expense of a new box would be justified; otherwise the owning company would be loathe to spend money if it didn't need to.

Here's a couple of shots of the original cabin (now at the Gwilli Railway), taken 21/7/2016.

DSCN2606.jpg

DSCN2609.jpg

Thank you for the information flying signalman, lovely photographs and importantly your sound suggestions. I didn't realise that the Gwilli Railway had moved the signal box from Aberaeron. I'll need to acquaint myself with that lovely preserved line and have a closer look. Unfortunately, my modelling real estate wouldn't cope with the addition of a Bay line!

[Les le Breton]

Hi folks, as an OAP I have been put off by the cost of buying ready made baseboards, so I've been investigating baseboard construction. I have planned for three scenic and one fiddle yard, each being 1220 x 606 x 60mm, strangely a standard size of MDF and plywood. I initially thought I'd use a system of 3mm Plywood cladding around 50 or 100mm compressed polystyrene, as seen somewhere but... I realised that I would need to cut large chunks of the polystyrene in order to fit servos underneath the baseboard, possibly reducing the integrity of the whole thing!

I am interested in the method proposed by Michael Watts in the January 2016 Railway Modeller. He suggested using MDF, but I think the thickness might be more vulnerable than plywood. The baseboards will be situated in an insulated garage but will need to be dismantled occasionally. What does the BRM think tank suggest? Any comments would be gratefully received.

[TerrySVR]

Looking forward to this we holiday at Newquay just down the coast. Martin who runs model shop in Aberaeron might prove helpful with your research.

[Les le Breton]

Looking forward to this we holiday at Newquay just down the coast. Martin who runs model shop in Aberaeron might prove helpful with your research.

Thanks for the support TERRYSVR. Are you perchance a supporter of the brilliant Severn Valley Railway which is fairly near to me?

I thought this photo of Aberayron from 1911 might be interesting.

[Siberian Snooper]

Hi folks, as an OAP I have been put off by the cost of buying ready made baseboards, so I've been investigating baseboard construction. I have planned for three scenic and one fiddle yard, each being 1220 x 606 x 60mm, strangely a standard size of MDF and plywood. I initially thought I'd use a system of 3mm Plywood cladding around 50 or 100mm compressed polystyrene, as seen somewhere but... I realised that I would need to cut large chunks of the polystyrene in order to fit servos underneath the baseboard, possibly reducing the integrity of the whole thing!

I am interested in the method proposed by Michael Watts in the January 2016 Railway Modeller. He suggested using MDF, but I think the thickness might be more vulnerable than plywood. The baseboards will be situated in an insulated garage but will need to be dismantled occasionally. What does the BRM think tank suggest? Any comments would be gratefully received.

 

Our club uses 6mm ply for sides, stiffeners and track bed and 10mm ply for the ends. The resulting boards in sizes up to 5ft x 3ft can be moved by one man. the other areas are filled in with polystyrene insulation, other stuff is available.

[Les le Breton]

Our club uses 6mm ply for sides, stiffeners and track bed and 10mm ply for the ends. The resulting boards in sizes up to 5ft x 3ft can be moved by one man. the other areas are filled in with polystyrene insulation, other stuff is available.

Thanks Siberian Snooper, Plywood is sturdier and lighter than MDF and your club's experience of manoeuvrability is a good guide for this oap.

The baseboard top is planned to be 3x606x1220mm;

The long sides will be 6x60x1220mm;

The baseboard ends will be 12x60x594 with engineers dowels for alignment;

The stiffeners will be 3x60x594.

Any useful advice on these dimensions?

[Captain Kernow]

Hi folks, as an OAP I have been put off by the cost of buying ready made baseboards, so I've been investigating baseboard construction. I have planned for three scenic and one fiddle yard, each being 1220 x 606 x 60mm, strangely a standard size of MDF and plywood. I initially thought I'd use a system of 3mm Plywood cladding around 50 or 100mm compressed polystyrene, as seen somewhere but... I realised that I would need to cut large chunks of the polystyrene in order to fit servos underneath the baseboard, possibly reducing the integrity of the whole thing!

I am interested in the method proposed by Michael Watts in the January 2016 Railway Modeller. He suggested using MDF, but I think the thickness might be more vulnerable than plywood. The baseboards will be situated in an insulated garage but will need to be dismantled occasionally. What does the BRM think tank suggest? Any comments would be gratefully received.

HI,

 

Our local club has decided to rebuild the baseboards of our large test track, due to long-term instabilities with MDF, so we will, I believe, be using marine ply.

 

Best of luck with your layout project, that's a lovely part of the world to set the layout in.

[Les le Breton]

HI,

 

Our local club has decided to rebuild the baseboards of our large test track, due to long-term instabilities with MDF, so we will, I believe, be using marine ply.

 

Best of luck with your layout project, that's a lovely part of the world to set the layout in.

Thank you for your knowledgeable advice Captain Kernow. I raided my railway piggy bank yesterday and bought the ply wood required for most of the layout. I have also managed to get some engineers' dowels to help the baseboards to join accurately.

 

I'm supposed to respect my elders, but it's getting harder and harder for me to find one now.

Edited November 18, 2016 by Les le Breton

[TerrySVR]

Thanks for the support TERRYSVR. Are you perchance a supporter of the brilliant Severn Valley Railway which is fairly near to me?

I thought this photo of Aberayron from 1911 might be interesting.1911 May 12th Aberayron Station Postcard.jpg

Living in Bewdley you have no choice but support SVR

[Les le Breton]

Hi y’all, it seems an age since I posted my plan for Aberaeron station, as celebrations, home DIY and more cogitating has been getting in the way of the important business of modelling! I would be grateful if you could take time to read my epistle which follows and advise me of the errors of my plan!

I was planning to use 3-link couplings but, on my test oval of Hornby track I discovered that I am not as dextrous as in my youth! Having read many forums in the RMweb and some of Iain Rice’s books, I have opted to change some stock to see if the Sprat and Winkle couplings would make life easier. They do seem to fit the bill and although fiddly to build, I am convinced that they actually look reasonable. Since my proposed model is a shunting layout, auto de-coupling will reduce the dangers of damaging rolling stock when dealing with stock, particularly on tracks to the back of the layout.

Other ideas I am planning are:-

• I will only fit latch wires to the locomotives and cosmetic screw couplings;
• I will try is to fit the S&W hooks and latch wire on the down end only of the goods stock, with only a wire to latch on to on the up end along with a cosmetic 3-link or Instanter coupling;
• Since TOADS will be required to change “ends” these will have hooks and latch wires on each end;
• Since the majority of sidings receive stock travelling in the down direction, the S&W fittings as outlined should enable the shuffling of goods stock to work. Wagons can be pushed into the siding, magnetically de-coupled and can be pushed to their destinations to be re-coupled to be placed in a train leaving Aberaeron;
• The only siding which presents difficulties is the coal siding. So, loco coal wagons will either need a full set of S&W couplings, a-la TOAD, or more likely, will require a TOAD to manoeuvre the wagons there and back;
• I don’t think the loco shed siding would require special measures as I’m hoping they will be self- propelled;
• Coaching stock is likely to have rakes connected by screw couplings with S&W hooks and latch wire to each end coach, (probably Guards coaches);
• GWR Brown Goods only need couplings like goods wagons, to be connected behind the Guards coach.

All contributions would be very welcome.

I’ll add a planning design for the magnet positioning which might make sense.

 

 

 

 

"Ladies and gentlemen, I do apologise for the delay to your service. I know you’re all dying to get home unless, of course, you happen to be married to my ex-wife, in which case you’ll want to cross over to the Westbound and go in the opposite direction."

London Underground driver announcement.

Edited February 3, 2017 by Les le Breton

[5BarVT]

There may be a fatal flaw in your coupling policy: locos need a hook on the adjacent wagon (unless every train has a van both ends). Wagons only have a hook on the down end, so how do Up goods attach to the loco?

Apologies if I have misunderstood your proposal. Paul.

[Les le Breton]

There may be a fatal flaw in your coupling policy: locos need a hook on the adjacent wagon (unless every train has a van both ends). Wagons only have a hook on the down end, so how do Up goods attach to the loco?

Apologies if I have misunderstood your proposal. Paul.

Thank you 5BarVT, I am grateful for your discovery of my basic error! I don't think this small branch line would use a pair of TOADS for the traffic, perhaps a few wagons could be double hooked and the shunting would have to ensure that one of these is next to the loco on the Up goods, perhaps a loco coal wagon.

A much appreciated observation.

[Siberian Snooper]

If there are livestock movements, these vehicles are usually attached to the loco, as it aids watering the animals especially on longer journeys.

 

You could reduce the number of magnets, if you use the delayed latching type couplings, said magnets would only need to be in advance of the first turnout in the ladder of the yard. Experience has shown that using electro magnets reduces spurious and unwanted uncoupling.

[Les le Breton]

If there are livestock movements, these vehicles are usually attached to the loco, as it aids watering the animals especially on longer journeys.

 

You could reduce the number of magnets, if you use the delayed latching type couplings, said magnets would only need to be in advance of the first turnout in the ladder of the yard. Experience has shown that using electro magnets reduces spurious and unwanted uncoupling.

Thank you for your advice Siberian Snooper, any addition which makes uncoupling more fail safe makes a lot of sense. Have you by any chance had experience with electro-magnets?

I'm fascinated by observation about livestock movements. I had no idea at all that livestock wagons would remain attached to the loco. I imagined that a loco shunting livestock into the cattle pen siding, would beat a hasty retreat, to give the animals more peace and quiet. In a similar vein, a loco of a  newly formed train with departing animals, would wait  until they were all safely loaded before coming to collect them.

 

"They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance."

Terry Pratchett

Edited February 4, 2017 by Les le Breton

[David C]

Not sure that the reason livestock wagons were coupled next to the loco was to aid watering. I think it was to reduce "surge" as the train accelerated and decelerated - think of the effect of loose coupled wagons on their occupants. This was the reason why virtually all cattle wagons were fitted with vacuum brakes (or at the very least, through pipes) by nationalisation. In order for these to work, they had to be marshalled next to the engine with any unfitted vehicles behind.

 

Watering would not have been a consideration - legally, livestock had to be fed and watered after a certain number of hours (can't remember how many!) and for this, they were usually released into cattle docks and then reloaded if they had not completed their journey. Buckets of water in a moving cattle train would have been something of a health hazard.

 

David C