Jump to content

Skinnylinny

Great Southern Railway (Fictitious) - Mr. Adams' Finest

Recommended Posts

I'll see if anyone at club has a 1F I cam borrow for the chassis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll see if anyone at club has a 1F I cam borrow for the chassis.

I've just thought of another loco which might suit better than the 1F, provided the mech doesn't take up too much space in a G6.  That's the Bachmann 64xx Pannier tank.  It has a wheel base of 29.33mm  + 29.33mm and driving wheels of 18.5mm.

 

Chris KT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I may well have been mistaken, my apologies. I was working off the drawing here where the rear wheelbase is given as 6'10" + 7'10". 

 

As for the ruler measurements, I have been a little sleep deprived, so might be worth sem34090 re-checking my measurements on the GWR 0-6-0 wheelbases!

I think this drawing is very much 'homemade' and it looks out of proportion in many ways.  There were 34 G6s built and the majority (24) had a wb of 6ft 10in + 7ft 5in as I said.  But the last 10, originally classed M9, did have a longer wb - 6ft 10in + 8ft. 

 

Depending how fussy one is boilers are also a minefield!  The first10 had O2 type boilers but the rest had boilers intended to re-boiler Beattie locos.  These had shorter barrels so the smokeboxes were longer to compensate.  Then later some got Drumond style boilers.........   But it's all a bit confused and the published books don't tell the whole story. 

 

Chris KT

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, my instant reaction to that drawing is that the cab looks too short.

 

This thread has a decent drawing within it, as well as a lot of other good stuff. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/97227-scratchbuilding-an-ex-lswr-g6/

 

I’m keeping an eye on all this, because I’ve got a loco that I’m intending to turn into a G6 when I get time. It won’t be perfectly accurate, but I want it to look the part.

 

Kevin

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I may well have been mistaken, my apologies. I was working off the drawing here where the rear wheelbase is given as 6'10" + 7'10". 

 

As for the ruler measurements, I have been a little sleep deprived, so might be worth sem34090 re-checking my measurements on the GWR 0-6-0 wheelbases!

Yes that drawing is very odd.  I've got my part built coarse scale 'O' G6 in front of me as I type this and that drawing really does look nothing like it.  And Kevin, repro Carrette G1 carriage buffers make very nice LSWR loco buffers in 'O' which is what I used on my handbuilt LSWR engines.

 

Is there any further news on the 'O' scale version of the condensed milk van as I'd love a couple for 'Foxwater'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, my instant reaction to that drawing is that the cab looks too short.

 

This thread has a decent drawing within it, as well as a lot of other good stuff. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/97227-scratchbuilding-an-ex-lswr-g6/

 

I’m keeping an eye on all this, because I’ve got a loco that I’m intending to turn into a G6 when I get time. It won’t be perfectly accurate, but I want it to look the part.

 

Kevin

 

I've passed on this drawing to sem34090, which I scanned from the Railway Modeller article, and which looks a lot more like the G6 from photos:

 

post-793-0-73795500-1518348126_thumb.jpg

 

Yes that drawing is very odd.  I've got my part built coarse scale 'O' G6 in front of me as I type this and that drawing really does look nothing like it.  And Kevin, repro Carrette G1 carriage buffers make very nice LSWR loco buffers in 'O' which is what I used on my handbuilt LSWR engines.

 

Is there any further news on the 'O' scale version of the condensed milk van as I'd love a couple for 'Foxwater'.

I'm currently trying to identify a suitable chassis kit for the body to go onto in O fine (the only readily-available wagon chassis kit seems to be the Peco kit for BR mineral wagons, which would look very odd to my eyes with such a short wheelbase), but I've fired an email to Derek at Progress Products this morning asking about the possibility of supplying wagon chassis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you - my main concern would be trying to figure out a morning and an evening peak service for the LSWR from Linton into London (via Bagshot and Ascot) and an LB&SCR service to Guildford (I suspect Horsham for commuters would be unlikely from this far afield!).

 

If there were any number of commuters into Horsham from the Guildford area that the Horsham-Guildford direct line would have been a bit more substantial than what it was. Even today the A road joining those two towns is a single carriageway nightmare. Horsham in any case didn't really start growing until the 1960s when a couple of major companies (Sun Alliance and Ciba-Geigy) moved in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sun Alliance... They're the ones who have the building that the A281 to Guildford, aren't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I think the branch was very quiet.

 

When I worked for BR in the 70s/80s, we had our engineer’s fleet depot at Horsham, and one of the guys who worked there had lived in one of the stations on the branch for donkeys years, back int9 the 50s, eventually buying it from the company at some stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I should forgo the rush hour service to Horsham, then, and run one late-morning trip each way and one early afternoon trip? I'm not sure whether people would be more likely to be travelling from Horsham to Linton for the day, or vice versa. I suppose it all depends on the amenities in Linton, but it's quite a trek...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the tinplate-style O gauge kits, I've I need to get a vague idea of how many kits are wanted, as I don't really have much use for tinplate O gauge wagons myself! So far, I see that Nearholmer and Annie would be interested in a few kits. Could you both let me know how many you'd be interested in? I'm expecting a cost of about £4 per body kit (not including roof, for which I would suggest either card or thin metal sheet), plus whatever the cost of the chassis would be, plus postage.

(Edited to add: Also, what kinds of couplings would you prefer: drop-link, Hornby auto-coupling?)

Thanks

Edited by Skinnylinny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linny

 

I’d rather envisaged that you could make the bodies, with DS handling the sales, because he is very well known in the ‘tinplate’ world, and must know what quantities sell. His ordering system, for instance, includes coupler and brake-lever options, around which every individual seems to have their own preferences. I’m pretty sure that he supplies roofs, but, if not, the6 are easy to make.

 

All that having been said, I would definitely take two, each with black brake levers and drop-link couplers.

 

Kevin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin,

Sadly, as it's not my laser cutter, I wouldn't be comfortable making any decent size of batch of these as it takes up time when other people might be needing to use the equipment. I'd rather stick to making them on a per-request basis as a hobbyist, I think.

It's not the fastest manufacturing method, so scaling production up quickly becomes impractical, not least because someone has to sit by the cutter and watch it whenever it's cutting to make sure it doesn't catch fire!

Linny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sun Alliance... They're the ones who have the building that the A281 to Guildford, aren't they?

Sun Alliance, now RSA, the MoreTh>n brand, took over a nine storey office block in the centre of Horsham. They expanded into loads of spare offices dotted around Horsham until they built a new set of offices in the late 1980s, demolishing the nine floor jobbie in the process. There has been severe retrenchment in RSA employment, partly due to automation but also due to a lot of functions moving to Liverpool after the merger with Royal in the 1990s. RSA only occupy one of their former offices now, the one that straddles the dual carriageway.

 

When Sun Alliance were spread round Horsham I once had a project to evaluate whether it was possible to put in microwave links to all the offices from the top of the nine storey building. I presented my report just as the decision to demolish the block was announced .........

Edited by whart57
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply Linny.  Yes very much a coarse scale and tinplate 'O' gauge girl here.  I would want two vans with drop link couplings as I find the Hornby auto coupler to be cumbersome and a tinplate scratcher to boot.  A chassis wouldn't be so critical for me though as I'm quite happy to make my own to fit the dimensions of the laser cut parts.  In fact on thinking about I think I would prefer just to have the body kit parts themselves whatever final size you make them and I'd take the rest from there  C1ST5Fx.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that G6 drawing you posted earlier looks to be the one I used for my model.  So thanks for posting it as somehow I've managed to lose my copy of the drawing and it's sort of essential so I can complete my model.  G1dDhSj.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I should forgo the rush hour service to Horsham, then, and run one late-morning trip each way and one early afternoon trip? I'm not sure whether people would be more likely to be travelling from Horsham to Linton for the day, or vice versa. I suppose it all depends on the amenities in Linton, but it's quite a trek...

 

The problem with imagining another independent company in the SE as you are doing, is that although most lines were promoted and built by independent concerns, when it came to operating them they first leased the line and later sold it to one of the three biggies - LSWR, Brighton and South Eastern. Now what you could do is imagine that some of those independently promoted lines turned to the Great Southern as their operator, and the obvious one is the Redhill, Guildford and Reading. Take on the Leatherhead and Horsham line, with a junction at Boxhill (aka Dorking Deepdene) to the RG&R and you could conceivably think of Great Southern services into London from Linton using running powers from Leatherhead or Redhill. Look up the West End and Crystal Palace railway and see if that gives you a route into Victoria

Edited by whart57
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about the above scenario, Boxhill Junction would make a great basis for a freelance pre-Group line. Like the LCDR it could cobble a way into London over the tracks of independently owned companies like the West End and Crystal Palace and then you'd have Victoria to Horsham and Victoria to Reading services plus locals to and from Redhill and Guildford. From a layout design point of view the connecting line for London to Reading trains could conceivably be on a sharp curve, which is always helpful and the Horsham platform might even be on a lower level. If you are really pushing for outlandish but still feasible operating ideas, some ex-London trains might drop off a Redhill coach to be taken on by the next local service. That would - pre-WW1 - mean your freelance outfit should have some tri-compo brakes, say 3-3-3-1-1-2-Bk layout in a 51' body.

 

One for the rule book experts. If the incoming London train drops off the coach for Redhill, how would the Guildford to Redhill local add it to the train? Would it shunt the entire train onto it, uncouple the engine and collect it or would there need to be a station pilot? And how would it work in reverse?

Edited by whart57
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, a fair amount of this layout is going to feature retaining walls, with the station being below ground level. I worked out that at a rough guess, I was going to need about 20 (real) feet of retaining wall or more. Somehow, the thought of scratchbuilding that much out of plasticard doesn't really appeal. I had a look at the Metcalfe card retaining walls, and I rather like the style (plus the fact that they do a double-track bridge and road ramps in matching style would tie everything together nicely. However, given I want to use this layout as an excuse to practise *some* scratchbuilding, the Metcalfe kits would look odd with buildings made of plasticard butting up against them (including the station building on the bridge!). Also, the card lacks any sort of relief, and I've not had great experiences of weathering the Metcalfe models (especially as I rather like using washes) So, the printed card kits are a nice thought, but not quite what I want.

post-793-0-35809600-1518710769_thumb.jpg

Plasticard and Wills brick arches are a possibility, but having to make up 60-80 arches (and with them being in straight lines, it would be obvious if I messed one up!) puts me off. Bachmann and Hornby Skaledale walls are out because of the difficulty in cutting and joining them neatly. Whatever is a modeller to do?

I came across two kits for walls from LCut Creative (website here) who do both a retaining wall with narrow arches and a viaduct section with brick backing. Best of all, they sell every single component separately, so you can mix and match to make whatever you want. The kits are laser-cut card, with laser-engraved brickwork, so no flat-card problems here.

I bought a small set of each, and the results are below:

 

post-793-0-95761300-1518709886_thumb.jpg post-793-0-68106400-1518709896_thumb.jpg

The wider-arched walls feel very airy and don't give a very cramped feel, which is what I'm going for, but the narrower arches (which are in fact taller) seem very deep - the backs are set back about 4 or 5 scale feet. I don't think stretcher bond is correct for these walls, but it's the only way their interlocking connections would work. Sadly no ramps available, but the card ought to be easy enough to butcher for these.

There are also double-track bridges and single-track tunnels available to match both sets, so what I'm thinking is using the narrower, taller arches, but only setting the rear wall back about 3 scale inches to give a little relief. Anyone have any thoughts?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thought is that the deep set-back is perfectly prototypical, and very common.

 

I’m trying to think of why, in structural terms, it might have been done, and I think it is that the inside walls of the recess create a box structure in conjunction with the forward parts, which will be much stronger than a flush-faced wall.

 

The flush-faced ones look more like a bricked-up viaduct, and have arches so wide that they wouldn’t offer much resistance against the pressure of soil from behind.

 

Kevin

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting though that the 7mm scale retaining wall of the same type by LCUT is a lot more shallow.  The slope back from top to bottom of the retaining wall is still there as it should be, but the recesses are notably less deep.  I'm going to be needing some of these for 'Foxwater' and I must say they are very nice.. 

 

NmKLzN9.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the narrower arches are growing on me. They're a bit of a fiddle to assemble, but I think I've worked out a couple of tricks that will make life easier. The tricky bit will be disguising the joins at the baseboard joints, but removable bits held on with Neodymium magnets or similar might prove useful here.

Last night was a busy night down at the Edinburgh and Lothians MRC clubroom - a few very-last-minute repairs to our 0 gauge layout "Puddle Bridge" before dismantling it, ready for loading into the trailer to go to Model Rail Scotland next week. Once that was done, I got some painting done of a MR 8-ton van (not pictured) and an LSWR van, both now ready for lettering up, and a little more work done on the Roxey Mouldings Stroudley brake van. It's not perfect by a long way, but as a first etched wagon kit, I'm very happy with it. Still needs a lamp pot on the roof, some brake gear (probably mostly representative, under those footboards!), glazing, handrails (I am planning a cheat's method for these) and painting.

 

post-793-0-55800000-1518786187_thumb.jpg

 

post-793-0-07019500-1518786194_thumb.jpg

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm currently trying to work out a timetable for the line. I'm mostly focussing on the trains that stop at Linton - some will most likely return to their starting point while others will go from Guildford to Linton and thus to Bagshot (and hence possibly to London via Ascot).

I've worked out a table of what I think should be reasonable timings for passenger trains between the stations, but as I grew up on Southern Electrics (mainly class 455s in the 1990s), I don't have much of a feel for what a steam loco could do. I'm working on the assumption of about 20 minutes "real time" at Linton for trains not continuing down the line but returning whence they came, considering that they will need to water, run around, possibly be turned (for tender locomotives) etc. 

Do these timings look vaguely plausible (assuming fairly level track), or am I being hopelessly optimistic?

post-793-0-08931600-1518979450.png

Would a pick-up goods be expected to be maybe 1/2 - 3/4 these average speeds between stations, allowing plenty of time for shunting at each stop? I'm rather out of my depth here!
 

Edited by Skinnylinny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pessimistic I'd say. Here are some timings from the 1910 Bradshaw of real trains out of Guildford:

 

Guildford to Aldershot

 

Guildford to Wanborough (4.5 mile)    10 min down, 8 min up

Wanborough to Ash (2 miles)     7 min down, 6 min up

Ash to Aldershot (3 miles)      7 min down, 8 min up

 

Guildford to Surbiton

 

Guildford to London Road (1.5 mile)   5 min (4 min on return)

London Road to Clandon (2.8 mile)       8 min (7 min on return)

Clandon to Horsley (3 mile)     8 min (both ways)

Horsley to Effingham Junction (1 mile)   4 min (both ways)

Effingham Junction to Cobham (1.5 mile)    5 min (both ways)

Cobham to Oxshott (1.8 mile)     6 min (5 min on return)

Oxshott to Claygate (1.8 mile)    5 min (both ways)

Claygate to Surbiton (3.2 mile)   8 min (both ways)

 

Looking at turn round times though I'd say your twenty minutes is a bit short, half an hour seems more typical for the era. Some could sit and wait a lot longer

 

Hope this helps

Edited by whart57
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree with Whart.

 

It was possible to turn round urban and inner-suburban trains very quickly indeed, especially if a turnover engine arrangement was used, so some quite frenetic schedules were operated by Lines like the District, GER, NLR etc.

 

But, once out in the country, turnaround times had to allow for all the locomotive necessities, a bit of downtime for the crew, and, the thing that is often forgotten, loading and unloading a big stack of parcels, which travelled in the guards van. They probably swept out the coaches too. All of that could be done fast, but it needed more staff if it was, so a balance had to be struck.

 

It was this thinking that led me to question the capacity of your terminus earlier in the thread. IIRC, you only have two platform faces, so for a provincial town I’d not be expecting it to handle more than a couple of trains in each direction every hour, whereas if it was inner-suburban it might bang through six or more in each direction.

 

And, if it is fed by a single line, the interval between trains is going to be heavily determined by the time to get to the first crossing place. The bare minimum interval between a departure and an arrival is double the transit time to the first crossing place, probably a couple of minutes longer in practice, which, when you cast it out, you will discover limits effective capacity quite severely.

Edited by Nearholmer

Share this post


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.