Jump to content
 

Channel 4 model railway challenge


Nearholmer
 Share

Recommended Posts

That's the type of problem-solving I like to see at least (putting the issue of there being a problem in need of solving in the first place), nice, simple, and low-tech. Why try complicated solutions when simple ones work?

 

Considering the nature of the track getting up the spiral, albeit with a minor but very awkwardly placed derailment (hadn't realised how high it was until then!) was all the more impressive.

I was most surprised that the spiral didn’t include some sort of access. How was it erected?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Regarding the plastic track, hasn’t someone already stated that the original concept was to use 0 Gauge and presumably, a rather smaller locomotive? Why was that changed? Perhaps because a suitable loco could not be sourced, or (perish the thought) Roundhouse were the only supplier to offer a loco and support, free of charge? It’s clear that running endurance was a significant constraint, as was the durability of the loco in such an aggressive environment (I greatly doubt that many such locos are used in such dirty conditions and foul weather, or for such long uninterrupted periods)

Robustness maybe? I'd expect a larger scale to be more robust in a tough environment. More fuel (or bigger batteries) carried on board means fewer stops for servicing, and less mechanical stress moving it at the same speed. Although smooth track laying turned out to be an issue it would've been a bigger one in a smaller scale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very, very interesting explanation of the background to the series and how the original intent of the production team had to change withing the first few days of filming, from a longstanding member of the 16mmNG Association, on their Yahoo Groups site.

 

I don't think I can, or should, post and copy as it is a closed site, but those of you who are members may find it a good read. I hope some of this at least comes out in the articles planned for BRM, 16mm Today and Garden Rail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was most surprised that the spiral didn’t include some sort of access. How was it erected?

We had a ladder that worked on slopes, but I think it had been tidied away by the time the loco team got there! The basic construction was to hammer stakes into the ground while the plywood vertical supports were being made, every other one of which was a ‘sandwich’ with two sheets of ply held apart by the same size battening as the stakes. This meant that they could be slipped over the top of the stakes and the height and location adjusted before being screwed in place. Sections of batten were then screwed between each of the uprights, checking the height gain with an iPhone inclinometer. We tested it with an O gauge wagon for bumps and smooth running of the track, but didn’t have an accurate loading gauge. We pretty much got it right, but her arse, sorry, rear buffer beam, hung out a bit more than expected and that was what hit an errant upright near the top.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regards to the track the problem seems to have been (which i mentioned ages ago but never had the answer) that no ground preparation was seen (not allowed?) so whatever track they used would have had exactly the same issues. If they'd have followed Prototype practice even to a limited extent they'd have had small cuttings and embankments! I assume that the owners of the footpaths used would not allow any changes to be made to their property?! I'm not surprised, had they gouged out a proper railway on those paths up the hills the amount of erosion come the first downpour or frost would have been horrendous!

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

Very, very interesting explanation of the background to the series and how the original intent of the production team had to change withing the first few days of filming, from a longstanding member of the 16mmNG Association, on their Yahoo Groups site.

 

I don't think I can, or should, post and copy as it is a closed site, but those of you who are members may find it a good read. I hope some of this at least comes out in the articles planned for BRM, 16mm Today and Garden Rail.

 

 

I'd be very interested to read that. I assume that the post is written by some-one on the production crew as to the best of my knowledge they didn't talk too much shop with the engineers and modellers.

 

Regards to the track the problem seems to have been (which i mentioned ages ago but never had the answer) that no ground preparation was seen (not allowed?) so whatever track they used would have had exactly the same issues. If they'd have followed Prototype practice even to a limited extent they'd have had small cuttings and embankments! I assume that the owners of the footpaths used would not allow any changes to be made to their property?! I'm not surprised, had they gouged out a proper railway on those paths up the hills the amount of erosion come the first downpour or frost would have been horrendous!

 

No changes were allowed. I think the notion of taking a spade and pickaxe to parts of the Great Glen Way would have gone down like a lead balloon with the authorities. There must have been a lot of very careful negotiating behind the scenes with various bodies to get the permissions to film this, and one of the more visible results of the hoops being jumped through are the lifejackets that people have poked fun at. When you do something official on some-one else's pitch you have to play by their rules, no matter how silly you might think they are.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regards to the track the problem seems to have been (which i mentioned ages ago but never had the answer) that no ground preparation was seen (not allowed?) so whatever track they used would have had exactly the same issues. If they'd have followed Prototype practice even to a limited extent they'd have had small cuttings and embankments! I assume that the owners of the footpaths used would not allow any changes to be made to their property?! I'm not surprised, had they gouged out a proper railway on those paths up the hills the amount of erosion come the first downpour or frost would have been horrendous!

I can understand they were not allowed to excavate the paths and tracks but surely a bit of packing under the track with gravel or sand would have prevented many of the derailments seen and once finished the residue would have been easily swept away to form part of the path surface. In the first episode it showed track being laid past a pile of gravel, I thought they intended to use it but, no. The track did seem to perform better on paved surfaces with less derailments unless they were edited out?

 

Richard

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be very interested to read that. I assume that the post is written by some-one on the production crew as to the best of my knowledge they didn't talk too much shop with the engineers and modellers.

 

If you have a Yahoo account you can join the group immediately as membership is not moderated.  Go in to Yahoo groups and search for "16mmngm".

 

Since the Yahoo group is open to any Yahoo member, I honestly don't think Mike's compunctions are valid.  I'm posting the words that Mike refers to here: it's in white font so you need to select the 'empty' space below with mouse or the space bar+cursor keys to read it.  If you really think it's confidential in some way then don't do that.

 

In the first few days on site there was definitely a feeling that it was necessary to keep the volunteers in the dark in order to create a challenge rather as “Scrap Heap” or some elements of “Bake Off” are done, and because of this much of the talent of the participants wasn’t actually used constructively. Once the realisation struck that the project was a hard physical challenge in itself, and various of the volunteers had had some serious conversations with Dick and the Producers, there was a change in attitude.

 

If someone can definitively demonstrate that the text shouldn't be here, I will remove it.  In my opinion it's in the public domain.

 

I notice that someone on that thread commented on the utter failure of the rack and pinion system.  It occurred to me as soon as I saw them laying it that there was probably going to be some problems with clearance at the fishplates.  I didn't expect it to be wrong everywhere - that really was poor!

Edited by ejstubbs
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Just to say that we as a family followed and thoroughly enjoyed the series for all sorts of reasons - the engineering challenges, the people, the locations and scenery*, the sheer entertainment of it and the achievement!  So well done and thank you to all involved.

 

*we have a lot of holidays in the Highlands and I have the midge bites to prove it!!

 

Ralph

Lambton 58

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a Yahoo account you can join the group immediately as membership is not moderated.  Go in to Yahoo groups and search for "16mmngm".

 

Since the Yahoo group is open to any Yahoo member, I honestly don't think Mike's compunctions are valid.  I'm posting the words that Mike refers to here: it's in white font so you need to select the 'empty' space below with mouse or the space bar+cursor keys to read it.  If you really think it's confidential in some way then don't do that.

 

In the first few days on site there was definitely a feeling that it was necessary to keep the volunteers in the dark in order to create a challenge rather as “Scrap Heap” or some elements of “Bake Off” are done, and because of this much of the talent of the participants wasn’t actually used constructively. Once the realisation struck that the project was a hard physical challenge in itself, and various of the volunteers had had some serious conversations with Dick and the Producers, there was a change in attitude.

 

If someone can definitively demonstrate that the text shouldn't be here, I will remove it.  In my opinion it's in the public domain.

 

I notice that someone on that thread commented on the utter failure of the rack and pinion system.  It occurred to me as soon as I saw them laying it that there was probably going to be some problems with clearance at the fishplates.  I didn't expect it to be wrong everywhere - that really was poor!

 

I will gladly concede if you are correct, but there has been much debate on there about whether access is allowed if you are not a 16mmNG Assoc member, which action constrains you to their rules and moderation. I know there is moderation, and I have seen it used, especially by Alan Regan. This is not so true of their facebook site, which is subject to FB's own rules.

 

So my "concern" is based on nearly 20 years of membership.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An excellent series, with something for everyone.....just like the hobby itself.  I was impressed with Dick Strawbridge, his 'can do attitude' and willingness to delegate to the expertise within the teams.  I suppose those characteristics are to be expected of a senior military officer and have certainly been evident in his 'chateaux' programmes.  Congratulations to all concerned!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will gladly concede if you are correct

 

Well, I joined the group earlier today simply by clicking "Join"...

 

This is what it says on the group's home page on Yahoo, under Group Settings:

This is a public group.

Attachments are permitted.

Members cannot hide email address.

Listed in Yahoo Groups directory.

Membership does not require approval.

Messages from new members require approval.

All members can post messages.

 

Apart from the limitation on posting by new members, it's open to all.

 

Postings to conversations may well be moderated - in fact the guidance under "Message content" would suggest quite strongly that they are - but membership of the group and therefore visibility of what other people have posted isn't.  At present.

Edited by ejstubbs
Link to post
Share on other sites

...I notice that someone on that thread commented on the utter failure of the rack and pinion system.  It occurred to me as soon as I saw them laying it that there was probably going to be some problems with clearance at the fishplates.  I didn't expect it to be wrong everywhere - that really was poor!

 

This was an example of where we were set up to fail. We had already seen that the track was sufficiently grippy with the rubber topped rails that the Silver Lady would run out of power before losing traction, so the rack was of no actual use in this scenario. The gradient that we built the rack up was sufficiently steep that we could not even walk up it on some parts without falling over and sliding down, and to top it all no one from production would tell us how high the rack needed to be to engage with the gear under the loco - so we guessed at approximately rail height and were 2mm out! An error when scaled up that would come out at an inch and a half so not really that big and should have been within the suspension travel. We were just given a box of stuff and had to guess what to do with it - fortunately a couple of us knew what a rack railway was!

 

While we knew it was unlikely to work we went ahead and laid the track and rack the full height of the ascent in atrocious weather when the biggest difficulty was the rain washing the cyanoacrylate adhesive off of everything (except our fingers) before we had a chance to stick anything together. we had to allow for the fishplates when fitting the rack over them by using thinner packing. It actually looked quite impressive when finished and the rack fitted to normal nickel silver rails would probably be very effective in a garden situation. There was enough material shot on this build to fill a full programme from the head scratching at the beginning as to what the box of stuff was and requests for information on the dimensions of where the gear was to the stuck together fingers and the sliding down the site on the mud. Even the factory site set up to cut down the fishplates to a manageable length and cut the packing down was well organised. Achieving what we did on this task was teamwork at its best, just laying the track would have been an arduous enough task without the rack - no quad bike on this location!

 

Paul

 

p.s. I will try and find an avatar photo.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand they were not allowed to excavate the paths and tracks but surely a bit of packing under the track with gravel or sand would have prevented many of the derailments seen and once finished the residue would have been easily swept away to form part of the path surface. In the first episode it showed track being laid past a pile of gravel, I thought they intended to use it but, no. The track did seem to perform better on paved surfaces with less derailments unless they were edited out?

 

Richard

 

On the first day of track laying we (Team 'D') were meticulous in getting the track properly supported and ballasted throughout the whole length of the site alongside the canal, and we laid every bit of track we could get our hands on that day with beautiful manufactured corners round every layby. At the next briefing we were told that the train was very forgiving of the track and we did not have to worry about packing, ballasting or even leveling the track - just slap it down and it would be fine - "Just good enough is good enough" was the catchphrase. I think you have drawn your own conclusions as to what was really needed, and it was not a relaxation of standards. I suspect that this 'advice' was more a ploy to double the rate of track laying which was already behind schedule rather than an observation on the running qualities of the train.

 

Paul

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The programme has been broadcast in full now so it is probably safe to comment as a participant without spoiling anything. It has been interesting to read some of the comments suggesting what might have been going on and the perception of what was successful and what was not.

 

It was a fun thing to do, and I think on balance everyone who took part had a very positive experience. We are all very fit now having walked about 150 miles during that fortnight much of it carrying heavy kit over difficult terrain inaccessible to even a quadbike. What was broadcast bears very little resemblance to the reality of what went on, and the finished cut was obviously created based on the footage that was obtained rather than what they thought they were going to show - otherwise the hours of footage following the teams filming every waking minute and interrogating us on every detail both on and off the job would not have been bothered with. Left in the can is material for a whole different series of programmes showing how the teams worked around problems and innovated to create solutions to problems that were not seen beforehand despite some quite meticulous planning for the most part.

 

I think in the end most participants featured have been shown in a positive light - you need to see the whole story thread in some cases to get the whole context. We all have personalities and don't always show a sunny disposition twenty four hours a day, so it only takes ten seconds to create a sound bite that can last a life time. My wife has her's printed on a tee-shirt now after her appearance on four in a bed (yes I do have a B&B too).

 

When we started I don't think any of us thought that we were going to get all the way, but we tried our hardest and working in our teams we managed to make progress way beyond what any of us thought we could do.

 

The question has been asked 'is it modelling or is it engineering?' The answer has to be it is both. The fundamental task was an engineering one - creating a railway in the landscape. The solutions to the problems though were often more akin to modelling where we were using what we had to hand and often using materials in a less than ideal way but in a way that did the job.

 

For those that think the crew just stood around and watched I can assure you that they were always on the move. While a team might be spread over a mile or more of worksite the crew would be constantly moving from place to place to ensure that everything got filmed and nothing at all was missed, and the crew took everything they needed for the whole day's filming with them on foot.

 

There was quite a lot of false jeopardy done with the intention to create suspense - but on the whole it probably backfired. Things were kept secret like the scale of the train which rather thwarted us being able to add a lot more. If I had known it was 16mm scale I could have brought along my rake of W&L wagons - they would have been great for testing!

 

You might have seen the Silver Lady fall off the track a few times. The rather beaten state of the loco at the end testifies that it was not really compatible with the track which was insufficiently rigid for a top heavy loco of such a weight. While the little steam loco definitely became the star of the show it was not quite as popular with the majority of track laying teams. There was a definite disconnect between the train provider and the track designers! The smaller and lighter and less top heavy battery locos would run all day on that track and never derail (well, not on Team 'D' track anyway!) It might have been nice to have more than one train run as a comparison.

 

You saw the back stories of a handful of the participants, but there were equally interesting stories to be told of most of the participants. When you recognise someone from the telly don't be shy - have a chat. For the most part you will find someone a lot more interesting than you have seen for twenty seconds on the telly, probably someone who is a major spoke in the wheel of the UK modelling industry and more than likely the organiser of your favourite exhibition.

 

Paul

As one of the reserves very glad to see you all made it. Well done on a fantastic achievement and well done to the TV people for making it watchable.

Edited by john new
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

On the first day of track laying we (Team 'D') were meticulous in getting the track properly supported and ballasted throughout the whole length of the site alongside the canal, and we laid every bit of track we could get our hands on that day with beautiful manufactured corners round every layby. At the next briefing we were told that the train was very forgiving of the track and we did not have to worry about packing, ballasting or even leveling the track - just slap it down and it would be fine - "Just good enough is good enough" was the catchphrase. I think you have drawn your own conclusions as to what was really needed, and it was not a relaxation of standards. I suspect that this 'advice' was more a ploy to double the rate of track laying which was already behind schedule rather than an observation on the running qualities of the train.

 

Paul

 

But if you'd laid all the track perfectly, the line would have finished somewhere in the middle of nowhere rather than making it to Inverness. If laying was behind schedule after 1 day then I can imagine the production crew WERE worried. Since the loco only had to pass over it once, I can see where they were coming from. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you'd laid all the track perfectly, the line would have finished somewhere in the middle of nowhere rather than making it to Inverness. If laying was behind schedule after 1 day then I can imagine the production crew WERE worried. Since the loco only had to pass over it once, I can see where they were coming from. 

 

We still laid more track than the other teams that day, and the limiting factor was getting hold of track to lay - we could have done twice as much. What would have helped was allowing the teams to have control of their own logistics, it is not like we didn't have a truck driver in our team!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you'd laid all the track perfectly, the line would have finished somewhere in the middle of nowhere rather than making it to Inverness. If laying was behind schedule after 1 day then I can imagine the production crew WERE worried. Since the loco only had to pass over it once, I can see where they were coming from. 

Didn't the Union Pacific have to be completely relaid very soon after the transcontinental RR was "completed"? * 

So. If the intention had been to run a service transporting very small things between Ft. William and Inverness someone would now be busy rebuilding it. :no:  

 

The ironic thing about all this is that one of the few industries that still makes use of, usually very short,  temporaryportable railways is  film and TV

 

 

*The estimate I heard was that the American government ended up paying for the transcontinental RR about three times over. Once in very valuable land grants that were soon worth a fortune when the railroad was built, then in the actual building of the line at highly inflated prices (the Credit Mobilier of America scanadal) and finally in rebuilding it to a usable standard.

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't the Union Pacific have to be completely relaid very soon after the transcontinental RR was "completed"? * 

So. If the intention had been to run a service transporting very small things between Ft. William and Inverness someone would now be busy rebuilding it. :no:  

 

The ironic thing about all this is that one of the few industries that still makes use of, usually very short,  temporaryportable railways is  film and TV

 

 

*The estimate I heard was that the American government ended up paying for the transcontinental RR about three times over. Once in very valuable land grants that were soon worth a fortune when the railroad was built, then in the actual building of the line at highly inflated prices (the Credit Mobilier of America scanadal) and finally in rebuilding it to a usable standard.

That’s a common problem. I’ve read the same of early restoration on the Festiniog and elsewhere.

 

Sometimes you just have to get traffic flowing to raise some revenue...

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of us modellers want to "get something running" when building a layout. Then we go back over and improve the track where required.

The trick is not to ballast it too soon. On my current layout it was more about making small but important changes to the trackplan than the actual tracklaying but I operated it bare boards with hand flicked Peco points  for quite some time before I was ready to move on to the next stage.

 

I wasn't though skimming vast sums of money from a Congress that I had very thoroughly bribed.  I'm not sure if it was the Credit Mobilier scandal (no connection with the French bank of the same name) that led to the definition attributed, probably falsely, to Simon Cameron (1799-1889)  that "an honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought."

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

In case anyone is feeling withdrawal symptoms already - the March issue of Garden Rail has an article by Andy Christie giving a look behind the scenes.

 

attachicon.gifMarchGRCover.jpg

 

On sale 15th February from all good newsagents or on-line.

 I'll have to get a copy and get Andy to autograph it for me. Thoroughly enjoyed the series, and glad they did what they set out to achieve.

  • Like 3
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...