Jump to content
 

Eyemouth O gauge 1906ish or 1923ish


sir douglas
 Share

Recommended Posts

long time since a post here, John Spence who shared with us his station building in N gauge back in July, has recently posted a photo in the Eyemouth FB group. He has built all the houses and church along the back which we have had to cut and will be painted on the backscene

146191462_10156646861432325_1562746501781773795_o.jpg.eb3081db69cd4834278bc3481d8af63a.jpg

  • Like 16
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just somewhat keeping this thread alive

 

Mark is Continuing with stock building

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118591-shezs-workbench/page/7/

 

I thought i would try scaling the hole in the bridge, here is an Engineer article with some dimensions, though i'll come back to that,of course there are plenty of photos but most of them are after track lifting, one with a train in it but completely hidden by smoke and finally one just before demolition.

 

Extract from the Engineer July 1894, 10ft from rail to the bottom of the top stone and 14ft from rail to the top of the arch, the resolution of this image i got isnt good so the portal width cant quite be made clear but it looks like 8 and something which is way too narrow. The width of the bridge on the right is 16'6", this is of course only if these measurements are correct, drawings in the Engineer are very good but every now and then can get something wrong but its not like we have anything else to work with so i dont mind

1087081849_articleeyemouthengineerjuly1894(2).jpg.10b67d036c14c930d0e6b0533f6aa256.jpg

 

if i impose the 10' and 14' onto the demolition photo the arch comes to about 23' dia' and the portal width comes to about 15'

1.JPG.a5d0199de67ece0766ec2e131a80915a.JPG

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Good to see you are keeping it alive Sam - I noticed some recent evidence of it being viewed.  I am continuing to build stock and have started work on the water tower, though an inpending house move is going to slow me down for a bit. 

 

Here is the class D now in her full Holmes livery.

 

IMG_20210202_163304.jpg.f8bf1b3d0f41c151cb22bd508a78cb5c.jpg

 

An article on this class in the latest NBR  study group journal by NBR loco guru Euan Cameron confirms this loco did in fact work the branch so we have the right one!  I  was feeling pretty smug that  I had all the details right but then the article pointed out that the small lubricators were not put on the side of the smokebox till a few years later.  (no doubt someone will point this out at the first exhibition...)  She is running well too but may need a bit more weight in the tanks - just looking forward to getting the club open again and giving her a proper test.   Crew also needed and a replacement lamp iron on the smokebox which I knocked off in painting.

  • Like 13
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Shez said:

no doubt someone will point this out at the first exhibition

Well, they will now that you have told everyone!

 

That is a beautiful model.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

nothing from me but more N scale from John, i have no connection to him or his work but since its about Eyemouth and it is really good quality, its worth sharing

 

all of this is omitted from ours, the church, the access ramp and the big house that blocked the harbour extension

 

photo by John Spence

204403457_10156892572342325_3430745257403966825_n.jpg.fa0810e4821f5138033c08063fc79f27.jpg

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'll have a look at the yard office now and at least draw it up

 

These are 4 extracts from photos, top left is from Ernie's 1929 aerial photo, top right is a recent FB post from the 1948 flood taken from the road, bottom left is undated looking at the back taken from the river bank near the harbour and bottom right is an early one (maybe 1896) showing the end from behind up on the road. The thing is the height difference between the long half and short half. Looking at the '29, the top of the roofs are equal until sometime later as shown in the '48 when the short building has dropped over a foot in height. the undated also shows the original proportions. this is maybe worth noting for anyone modelling it later but for us will be modelled as built. It doesnt look to me like the short building is instead lower on slopped ground as on the '29 looks about level

office.jpg.d79836bc707ba6cc2e66caaaf3a38fc6.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

me and mark had a meet up at the club last night for the first time since March 2020, some locos were run up and down the layout and we now have a new member wanting to get involved, hopefully progress will restart. i dont know if he is okay being named here so for now we'll call him Mr C. i finally brought in the power supply box i made and with my Peckett made sure it all worked, Mark brought in the J83 No828 and his J21 No152 for its first run, lovely thing it is too with the red lining. Both of these have been numbered after those which are known to have worked the branch. Mr C has said he wants to build a J39 which will be good for the BR period

 

828

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118591-shezs-workbench/&do=findComment&comment=4303595

152

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118591-shezs-workbench/&do=findComment&comment=4141147

Edited by sir douglas
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Our enigmatic Mr C does actually have an RM web presence as 25A.  It was good to get back to the layout again and it was great to see it all worked.  Thanks for the nice comments about the J21 Sam, but I feel she still needs a little bit of tweaking to get her running well.  I think the tender drawbar may be the key as its pushing the tender up a bit and we are not getting the full benefit of the tender pick ups.  I think that the drawbar is also causing the tender first track issues over the turnouts. The stalled house move still hindering progress at this end and an unexpected week on grandad duty means I have not been able to bet back down to the clubroom.

 

Goods office and the groundframe hut are looking good. I have started work on the water tank. I am making the actual tank from scrap etch left over from loco kits - but as the soldering iron and bench are packed away I cant get on for now.

 

If anyone else in the West Yorks area wants to join in on the project come and join us!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

some major re working needed to be done at the bridge end since i forgot about the retaining wall when designing and cutting the board parts. In this photo, the hillside inbetween the river and track was cut back to include a wall and so the river also had to be widened, the wall went in since this photo which is the strip of ply on the left having blocks of wood glued on either end, off the right the wall will taper down and end on the right hand side of view. Also being worked on are the road pieces being glued and screwed along the back and a start has been made at the other end filling in the void for the station/yard entrance with the bottom of the ramp and the adjoining garden

80055232_eyemouth(116).JPG.d3a03add13990e75ca0a408883231a9e.JPG

 

Last night Mr C brought in 2 of his DCC locos, hooked up his own controller to the layout and had a play. This also shows the compatibility as intended

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Really delighted with the job Colm has done in putting the DCC workings into no 828.  The decoder is a  zimo and I got it from Digitrains at Lincoln.   The sound file is actually a J15 as no recording of a D class exists. Convincing enough for me though with the westinghouse there as well.  Lots of credit to Sam as well for his imaginative approach to wiring which enables the layout to run on either DCC or analogue. Just need to put the crew in now - I don't like "ghost trains!"  Unfortunately stock construction is still temporarily shelved pending our ongoing house move which continues to drag.

 

I must admit to having been a DCC sceptic. Pretty convinced it was not for me. That changed a few weeks ago when Colm brought down some of his stock and we had it going on the layout. The sound was great, adds another dimension. However what really impressed me was the level of control, and the slow running, the realistic acceleration slowing and braking. I think I have reached a point where I am prepared to commit - a sort of railway modelling road to Damascus!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

progress is being made on the bridge and we will start on the platform, no photos since i forgot with all the chatting and playing trains, now DCC fitted 828 had some more running, Colm (formally Mr C) brought in a NE G5 he is currently building and a Heljan Clayton 17 he has just bought, the layout is running good apart from some minor point blade fettling needed

 

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Pointwork on the crossover needed work, shown below; the operating piano wire was rubbing on the slot n the left hand point and the nearside stock rail needed slewing on the right point, they work fine now

1566579482_eyemouth(124).JPG.63909ed7b0dcebda184d8e123c7524cb.JPG

 

applying card to the underside of the bridge arches using oo track pins to hold them while the glue dries

508795993_eyemouth(125).JPG.2dbef5d1da6e5791437c4da63feba4d9.JPG

 

Making the platforms was going to be next but just like with the bridge before, i forgot about the retaing wall while making the boards and then saw in the photos that the platform was a lot narrower than first though. The embankment will have to come out from the back, the road needs remaking here and the frame strecthers need to be either patched in or replaced.

 

below; on the left is the middle board showing the diamond-ish shape patch with its corresponding patch on the other board shown bottom right. this board is sat on its back while i work on it. The next strecther along had to be completely replaced

1064085156_eyemouth(126).JPG.80b7ce498916bdd58361727bb88ae3ab.JPG

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

had a play session last night, Last week i was talking with a member who has a Dapol 08 but no track to run it on, so i suggested he bring it in to run on here, so i brought a loco and some wagons. unfortunately my loco wouldnt budge (i should have checked i beforehand) but the 08 soon arrived and some shunting took place, i particularly wanted to see how the points handle a set of wagons being preopelled through them. everything went fine apart from one of the point motors not working

DSCN7005.JPG.ccdf731bbc37227e9a6133fd35b19a5b.JPG

Edited by sir douglas
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

A good session last night. Sam sorted out a problem with a point. Colm sprayed the track and I carried on with undercoating the woodwork. We have also had a number of conversations regarding control of the pointwork in the branches early days and I wanted to perhaps get some reaction to this mornings research...

 

There was never a signal box at Eyemouth. The points were unlocked by key and some early photos appear to show NBR pattern point levers for the siding points. Train control was by hand signals the branch being strictly one engine in steam.  The big question is the run round loop that we have modelled. Sam has suggested that it may have been changed from an interlocking ground frame in near the first point where the line splits. Some photos appear to show a small hut. However there seems to be no sign of rodding linking it to the crossover points at the east end. 

 

Further more on page 63 of Roger Jermys book "The Eyemouth Branch" it cites a proposal to errect a goods shed adjacent to the sidings in 1896. This would have necessitated "moving the groundframe which allowed the locomotive to run around. " This suggests the points were operated from the eastern rather than western end of the station.  I can't see photographic evidence for this - problem is that that end of the station is often obscured by merchandise or stock. Same problem with buffer stops.

 

In a wider context although the board of trade had recommending the use of interlocking on passenger lines since the 1870s the legislation to enforce it was not enacted by parliament until the year after the Eyemouth line was opened following the Armagh disaster. The line was built by a small local company and reports in Jermys book suggest that the inspector Major Marindin was dissatisfied with much of the work. It may well be possible that the loop was installed without interlocking.

 

The NBR, unlike its neighbour and rival the Caledonian had opposed regulation and been slow to adopt interlocking. It was therefore faced with a massive programme of upgrading its signaling systems which for a railway famous for its tight fistedness would be somewhat frustrating.  While new constructions had interlocking backdating minor lines took some time.

 

After the NBR took over in 1901 an extensive plan was put forward for remodeling the station the plans including a new lever frame.  (Jermy p age 67)  Apart from the new station building to replace the one destroyed by fire in 1900, this plan came to nothing as did a second more ambitious plan in 1907.  With the plans not coming to fruition could this have persuaded the NBR to remove the now illegal crossover and operate with the gravity shunting for which the branch became known, rather than upgrade the instillation now it was clear the improvements were not to take place?  (Or perhaps removed it in anticipation of the changes taking place.  Evidence is contradictory - its not on 1906 OS but its on the 1907 plan. Did the NBR intend to re instate it with a new frame and interlocking as part of the extensive re modelling?  That would explain the apparent contradiction)

 

One of the lessons of my researches this morning is  that if we choose to model railways in this era we must be careful about assuming the "rule books" of later years applied to earlier days.

 

I would welcome thoughts from those who may be more informed on such matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we have circumstantial evidence a best and i'm not saying this is proof, but

 

"station is often obscured by merchandise or stock."   as well as staff and passengers, i can't see them putting the groundframe at that end when your view of the train movements will get blocked by all the above. Logically the best place if it did have a frame is at the first point which gives the best view of not only all the tracks in the station and sidings but also up the line under bridge.

 

our only evidence are photos like these below, these are extracts from 3 photos focusing on the hut. In the first photo there is a row of dots to he righ of the hut running along the other side of the track much like the stools of rodding would and in the bottom right photo is a line of something going from the hut and going past the waer tower wih a another line from the hut towards the camers to he first point

1150524334_eyemouthleverhut.jpg.74b36d10ac3aa7730b89da65faaa91fb.jpg

 

This is an extrac from the well known 1906 photo, we were looking at a much better quality of this in a Byline article recently which. Somethign we never noticed before was a check rail on the right hand rail on the curve into the platform (in between the tower and the carriage).  there is a row of dots again on the left but oddly it stops at the tower, maybe it was just being installed at he time or the frame (assuming the was one) or it only protected the 2 facing points. another thing is that there clearly isnt any kind of lever or throw on the crossover point to the left of the loco. there are 2 things between the track (beween the tower and the loco) which Mark suggests could be point levers but they look like they are only about 1 foot tall so unless hey are weighted throws (example below)

394659628_photoeyemouth1906B.jpg.275c8dd5e3ad5e4d854532752e8ee05c.jpg

1923757010_trackpointthrows(2).jpg.2e51d1ab33d4760664a60fa841dd291e.jpg

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...