Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Alex, This is from the 1953 OS 1:2500 map on old-maps.co.uk:

 

yelpent1.png.9d3da86509106cee13b6a42631abb2a7.png

 

This map has the standard 100m grid on it so it's possible to measure the building approximately and I get this:

yelpent2.png.1bdbcdc2c7471f8a6369a652a6fa43e9.png

 

Do those numbers seem right?

 

Edit: Actually, I suspect there's a right angled corner against the branch platform as well (Point E on your drawing). I'll adjust the shape to do that and see how far it deviates from the OS map outline...

 

Edited by Harlequin
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

With a right angle at point E:

yelpent3.png.4c9b8922f4ca7891bf1c896fc994ad7e.png

 

You can see that the CE wall deviates from the OS map now but that was probably difficult for the map makers to survey and draw accurately.

 

That feels better to me. Right-angles are good.

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

Thanks Brian

I think I'm more or less there with the building. As you say in the absence of definitive information, a little modellers licence won't hurt!

i've found a wonderful set of colour photos of the buildings at Yelverton on Malcolm Mitchell's "A" shop Facebook page. They were taken by the late George Iliffe-Stokes in about 1958 when he was researching for the models at Pendon. Have you seen them?

Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the replies. My apologies for my lateness in replying, but I've only just seen them as I've been away from here for about 10 days.

Special thanks to Phil if I may for the plans.

We walked along the line from Pricetown a few weeks ago. It,t a nice walk, and it was interesting seeing the road from Dousland from a different angle. I know the Fox Tor well, as it's a coffe stop on my regular cycle rides. I have a loyalty card...

Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've started work on some of the buildings for Yelverton.

First up is the pagoda on the down platform. I used two Wills kits, and I've taken a picture of the completed building posed with the Wills packet, to show the changes. The width is the same, but it now has widows in the front, and double doors. I haven't weathered it yet and the roof isn.t glued in place, which is why it is slightly offset in the picture!  Having got this far, I'm not totally happy with the front, as I feel the windows and door are set too far back in the sides, and I may rebuild this.

DSCF1802.jpg.bc87a088f1560db851743356e2cb15c0.jpg

 

I've started wotk on the down platform building, and the pictures show progress to date.

DSCF1803.jpg.03ed0d156b670a8b17b6e7544d2834ad.jpg

 

DSCF1804.jpg.ece205fb26f93220b90dc4e1d3d48cd4.jpg

 

 

I'm keen to start work on the up platform building I'm ptretty confident we have establised the shape, and I've found some useful pictures. In the period of my model (1958), the south end in  particular was heavily weathered, due, I suspect, to exposure to the elements, and this presents an opportunity to try some new techniques.

 

I'm hoping to get the framework for the baseboards cut ths weekend, then I'm planning further development on the motive power front. There will then be a hiatus for the next few weeks, as I need to do some work on Upwell Drove to make it ready for  a couple of shows later in the year.

 

Alex.

DSCF1800.jpg

Edited by wiggoforgold
Added sentence
  • Like 17
Link to post
Share on other sites

The sides are 55mm high from platform level to the top of the sides. The front is 40 thou lower than the sides and ends to allow for a false ceiling which will also support the back edge of the canopy.

The panels are from Slaters 2mm planked plasticard, which is 30 thou I think. The length of the sides is calculated by counting the number of planks on the real thing, and using the same number of plasticard planks. The vertical framing is from 0.8mm x 2.0 mm Plastruct strip (90734) and the board beading is 0.4mm Plastruct rod ((90710). I can pm you a scan of my very rough scketch if you like.

The panels have a backing of 30 thou plastic sheet (with apertures for the glazing) for strength.

Alex

 

Edited by wiggoforgold
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

For what it's worth I used the same map as above to measure the down platform building and I get 2.75m by 8.36m.

 

I counted the planks on the awning, and measured a strip of Slaters GWR valence and that gave me 26'6"!

can I be cheeky and ask your view of the width of the accommodation bridge?

Alex

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
19 minutes ago, wiggoforgold said:

I counted the planks on the awning, and measured a strip of Slaters GWR valence and that gave me 26'6"!

can I be cheeky and ask your view of the width of the accommodation bridge?

Alex

 

No problem. I'm not familiar with the structure but if you believe the map it seems to be slightly lozenge shaped on plan:

yelaccom1.png.ba39cdd27a03f9c3b111e1261b5f1079.png

 

BTW: Our size estimates for the down platform building are straddling 9ft by 27ft - in other words exactly three times as long as it is wide... Significant? I don't know.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the current state of play with the Down platform buildings for Yelverton.

DSCF1806.jpg.bad638641f125a6e962f954500e1e07c.jpg

 

DSCF1808.jpg.d436ab90505dc1b38ddd8b08f1067c4e.jpg

 

 

The pagoda is from two Wills kits, but I'm not happy with the front wall, and am going to rework it so the windows and door are not recessed so far. The waiting room is being scratchbuilt from styrene sheet and strip.

Next on the workbench is a 45xx. I reckon for now I can spend about another 10 days on this, before doing some work to get Upwell Drove ready for it's next show,

 

Alex

DSCF1811.jpg

Edited by wiggoforgold
  • Like 9
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice old picture, Phil.  Never quite sure what that kind of track is referred to, certainly no chairs or sleepers like the later variety but can be early with the two branch points in situ.  The locals look pretty prosperous and I can relate to the kids In school caps and raincoats, looks around WW1.  I was there in the fifties although uniforms didn't change that much over the years and the station remained the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting the picture Phil. Yes it is of use. It's quite a common view point over the years but I hadn't seen that one before. As well as another end view of the down platform , it give some useful views of the platform surface and the fence panels behind the platform, which will all go onto the model.

the pagoda on the down platform must be nearly new; there's a similar photo from the same viewpoint which mst have been taken a few years earlier, and the pagoda is not present.

Alex

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, brianusa said:

Nice old picture, Phil.  Never quite sure what that kind of track is referred to, certainly no chairs or sleepers like the later variety but can be early with the two branch points in situ.  The locals look pretty prosperous and I can relate to the kids In school caps and raincoats, looks around WW1.  I was there in the fifties although uniforms didn't change that much over the years and the station remained the same.

 

Brian, it's baulk track.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12 August 2019 at 20:41, Tim V said:

You do know that Pendon measured up Yelverton building for their model - perhaps you could ask them for a copy of their drawings?

I do indeed Tim. I've asked, but I haven't heard anything yet. I'm not too worried though as I've found some really good photos on Malcolm Mitchell's "A" shop Facebook page, which George Illife Stokes took when he was working on the model.  We've established the main dimensions I think, so I've got enough to produce some workable drawings.

Alex

Edited by wiggoforgold
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brianusa said:

Ah, baulk track is it?  Thought it might be, but not sure with dating, etc.  So any idea of the change to conventional track which might put my estimate around WW1 to shame.:dontknow:

     Brian.

Brian, Frith photo from similar view point dated 1906 shows baulk track and no pagoda.

Alex

  • Thanks 1
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...