Jump to content

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Brinkly said:

 

Generally, I've found over the years that if I put something up on RMWeb, one it generates a bit of discussion, which is good and two I tend to get on with the next bit!

 

I didn't think there is anything wrong with using a lot of RTR and RTP models on a first layout, nor subsequent layouts if it pleases the builder. Don't get me wrong, I admire those folk who build stunning layouts from scratch as their first attempt, but I lack the time and the skills to march in and do the same thing straight away. 

 

The important thing is that we have a hobby and are doing something constructive, rather than vegetating in front of a screen! 

 

Get cracking @LBRJ

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

 

34 minutes ago, Brinkly said:

It seems to be raining again this morning; although, some odd patches of blue sky can be seen...

 

Werble-15C3765268.GIF.be9036221c1e5574881992dbe24db99f.GIF

 

 

Oi you, stop vegetating in front of a screen and do something constructive!

  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

Less is more ladies..............just saying...

 

 

Rob 

"Ah, but think how much more more would be!" - Frasier Crane

 

I totally agree that it's a bad idea to pack the boards with track, and goodness knows 6ft by 1ft is a pretty small box ;-) but the description of Mary Tavy and its signal box got me thinking about just showing one end of a passing loop as mentioned earlier.

 

I came up with this:

1355938138_Brinkly5.png.26947c04f764b3c9fbe44f6b0b9b0ede.png

 

Maybe I've gone too far (in many ways!) however:

  • Small signal box
  • Passing loop completed off-scene in fiddle yard - you can legitimately have two trains on scene at once!
  • Staggered platforms with 2ft visible of  4ft long Up platform face
  • Access to tiny goods yard trailing off the Down loop (the BOT would be proud!)
  • Tricky-to-shunt kickback end-loading bay (going too far???) traps the goods area

It's a little bit lumpy because of the baseboard joint and having to use only large radius points but it's not too bad... Still room for scenery behind.

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Interesting idea Phil, that might end up being on the opposite side! ;):lol: Curved fiddle yards in between, now there's an idea! 

 

I'm pleased to report succesful track laying this morning @St Enodoc ;) 

 

The new Peco fishplates are excellent products. 

 

IMG_2239.jpg.03cb41a9739a07a1ab0b0e67674904f7.jpg

 

IMG_2181.jpg.44ef9a889bc8d05da0717b3225d93f68.jpg

Copper clad sleeper at the exit to the fiddle yard.

 

My plan is to lay the running line this morning and hopefully the goods yard late afternoon/early evening.

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

Splendid stuff, Brinkers. 

 

This is right up my street and is developing very nicely. 

 

Would you like a pagoda? 

 

 

Rob 

Would you like rice or chips with it?

  • Like 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Harlequin said:

"Ah, but think how much more more would be!" - Frasier Crane

 

I totally agree that it's a bad idea to pack the boards with track, and goodness knows 6ft by 1ft is a pretty small box ;-) but the description of Mary Tavy and its signal box got me thinking about just showing one end of a passing loop as mentioned earlier.

 

I came up with this:

1355938138_Brinkly5.png.26947c04f764b3c9fbe44f6b0b9b0ede.png

 

Maybe I've gone too far (in many ways!) however:

  • Small signal box
  • Passing loop completed off-scene in fiddle yard - you can legitimately have two trains on scene at once!
  • Staggered platforms with 2ft visible of  4ft long Up platform face
  • Access to tiny goods yard trailing off the Down loop (the BOT would be proud!)
  • Tricky-to-shunt kickback end-loading bay (going too far???) traps the goods area

It's a little bit lumpy because of the baseboard joint and having to use only large radius points but it's not too bad... Still room for scenery behind.

 

This is very similar to Ken Gibbons 'New Quay' layout, always one of my favourite schemes. Looks very tempting but the goods siding / headshunt is rather short and having points connected across the board joint might be troublesome. I know you are constrained by the geometry but the arrangement looks slightly strange, perhaps due to the siding not being parallel to the 'main' line.

If only there was an extra foot length (something I've thought so many times)!

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
On 31/07/2019 at 07:38, Brinkly said:

It seems to be raining again this morning; although, some odd patches of blue sky can be seen...

 

Werble-15C3765268.GIF.be9036221c1e5574881992dbe24db99f.GIF

 

 

I'd get that roof fixed, if I were you.

 

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

Each siding would be operated by trains travelling in either the up or down directions but not both.

So in practice you would have an up siding and a down siding.

The wagons could be moved from one siding to the other by pry bar or borrowing a farmers horse or tractor.

 

Gordon A

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Greetings everyone,

 

Thank you again for all your comments and interest. 

 

I am please to to report that track laying has been successfully completed. 

 

IMG_2270.jpg.af14e495463fc74f25568c0bbc82d966.jpg

 

IMG_2271.jpg.946334ac90623ff6cf39312db851dbea.jpg

Copper clad sleepers have been fitted and soldered in place this morning.

 

IMG_2273.jpg.9b386f5d0d26a4d56a0fdfbf36e50af9.jpg

Same on the exit to the fiddle yards.

 

I'm planning to fit the droppers this afternoon, two per rail: no chances being taken! 

 

Regards,

 

Nick

 

 

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Droppers have been fitted this evening. This turned out to be a real pig of a job due to the intergrated lighting rig. One had to become a amateur contortionist!! 

 

IMG_2277.jpg.d4acd3c7ef683f629e097662d4e3019e.jpg

Two droppers per length of rail. A real 'belt and braces' approach! 

 

Thanks for reading.

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

 

Edited by Brinkly
Typo
  • Like 6
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Brinkly said:

Copper clad sleepers have been fitted and soldered in place this morning.

 

I would strongly recommend that you now drill and pin them, especially those at the very end of each board.

 

I drill to take a Peco track pin, insert pin into hole and tap pin carefully in. Top of pin then ground almost off and can then be disguised when track is painted.

 

This really helps strengthen the track at each board joint.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

On the visible copper clad sleepers, you'll loose little integrity in the joint if you remove most of the solder that's not directly underneath the rail, in order to make room for cosmetic chairs. Does the rail sit directly on the top of the copper clad sleeper or is there a gap?

 

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

On the visible copper clad sleepers, you'll loose little integrity in the joint if you remove most of the solder that's not directly underneath the rail, in order to make room for cosmetic chairs. Does the rail sit directly on the top of the copper clad sleeper or is there a gap?

 

 

There is a small amount of brass shim under the rail to hold it up: I remembered your work in that area!

 

Thanks for the tip pins. Will do tomorrow. 

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Brinkly said:

 

There is a small amount of brass shim under the rail to hold it up: I remembered your work in that area!

 

Thanks for the tip pins. Will do tomorrow. 

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

Don't bash them in too hard or you'll upset the vertical alignment.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
10 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Don't bash them in too hard or you'll upset the vertical alignment.

Agreed. The holes in the sleepers should be big enough to avoid friction when tapping pins into baseboard. To avoid risk of pins bending, part drill baseboard as well but with slightly smaller diameter drill. Tap gently with small hammer. If possible, coat pin with epoxy before putting it into hole and wipe excess off top of sleeper when fully in, with cotton bud or similar.

 

Normally pinning sleepers like this is best done prior to soldering sleeper to rail and before disc cutting rail across join.

 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Brinkly said:

Droppers have been fitted this evening. This turned out to be a real pig of a job due to the intergrated lighting rig. One had to become a amateur contortionist!! 

 

 

I have the same boards, but left the lighting pelmet off while working on the layout. Currently temporarily screwed on ready for Railwells.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One should of course always remember to use a nail drift when tapping track pins into place - Rather reduces the chance of a miss hit with the tack hammer banging the code 75 out of shape

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

I go on holiday for a couple of weeks and when I get back you have a whole new layout on the go :)

 

Looks good so far. 

 

You’ll have to update your signature as St Breward is to be no more.

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
8 minutes ago, Taz said:

I go on holiday for a couple of weeks and when I get back you have a whole new layout on the go :)

 

Looks good so far. 

 

You’ll have to update your signature as St Breward is to be no more.

 

Haha - yeah, I do need to re St. Breward.

 

Well I thought it was more sensible to stick with the end goal, rather than doing something different. 

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Diverging a bit from the model aspect of this branch, is there any reference to how long the platforms were of the intermediate stations such as Mary Tavy from mixed gauge days?  From the pictures, they don't appear to be very long which may be OK for normal trains, but a bit short for seasonal traffic such as Market Days and Goose Fair, etc.  Also is there any info on the Southern period?  All I know is that an M7 derailed going too fast on a passenger train, so how many carriages were in the SR trains then?  Couldn't have been more than three or perhaps four due to platform length.

  Perhaps Nick could say how long Whitchurch will be!:mellow:

           Brian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, brianusa said:

Diverging a bit from the model aspect of this branch, is there any reference to how long the platforms were of the intermediate stations such as Mary Tavy from mixed gauge days?  From the pictures, they don't appear to be very long which may be OK for normal trains, but a bit short for seasonal traffic such as Market Days and Goose Fair, etc.  Also is there any info on the Southern period?  All I know is that an M7 derailed going too fast on a passenger train, so how many carriages were in the SR trains then?  Couldn't have been more than three or perhaps four due to platform length.

  Perhaps Nick could say how long Whitchurch will be!:mellow:

           Brian.

 

Hi Brian,

 

With regard to train length, I'm not sure what a typical LSWR train of the period would have been. The LSWR used the branch between 1876-1890, so I would imagine that company would have been using a mix of 4 and 6 wheeled coaches in the earlier days, progressing to bogie stock towards the end. I really don't know. Locomotive wise, Beattie 2-4-0s outsted the Beyer Peacock 'Metropolitan' or 'Plymouth' 4-4-0s in the 1870s. Subsequently, Adams 4-4-2 locomotives replaced them in the 1880s. 

 

There  was one major accident on the Launceston branch in 1885. A LSWR '395' class locomotive came off the line at Yelverton, killing the driver and seriously injuring the firemen. That train was comprised of 11 coaches - the Waterloo to Devonport service. 

 

I think the accident you are referring to happened on the LSWR mainline between Tavistock and Plymouth around 1900 I believe, but I'm not totally sure. I know the the 1950s Southern Region trains heading on the former LSWR route ranged from 2 coach local trains up to 8 coaches expresses - the Brighton train being a good example of a reasonably long formation. 

 

With regard to platform length, Whitchurch Down was built in 1908 primarily for seasonal and weekend traffic (tourists essentially) - the platform is only a mile away from Tavistock, so I imagine the GWR didn't feel it was worth building anything there initially due to the distance to Tavy. The platform was 351ft long, being that size for summer excursion traffic. My my own version of Whitchurch will only be 2ft long! Space is a little tight on my version.

 

Both Coryton and Mary Tavy's platform were 300ft. The down platform at Mary Tavy was taken out of use quite quickly after 1890, with the loop and signalling equipment going by or during WW1: the record is a little unclear. 

 

Hope this is of use.

 

Regards,

 

Nick. 

Edited by Brinkly
Typos - I hate drafting lengthy pieces on an iPad!
  • Like 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
×
×
  • 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.