Penlan Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 CK, don't forget the signal wire posts too..... On straight runs I measured 24' feet apart from period photo's. Penlan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted October 27, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 And the stationmaster agreed too, But would it have been cost effective to have removed the outer (third) casting to remove the roller If there had been some alterations/upgrading to the rodding and point operations in later LMS/BR times, would not the whole lot have been changed over to channel rodding, just a thought I agree, Sandy, but given that we have now established that the MR would only have installed the one rodding run to work both point end and FPL, we are still left with just the one rodding run, once the FPL element has been removed. If the FPL had had a seperate rodding run, as it would have had with GWR practice, for example, then it would have been entirely appropriate to have left the old stool empty. But in this case, the rodding run would look outwardly just the same in 1960 as it would have in 1920, when there was a FPL fitted.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted October 27, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 CK, don't forget the signal wire posts too..... On straight runs I measured 24' feet apart from period photo's. Penlan Yes, thanks for that - that's a useful measurement. I do have the requisite MSE castings for the signal wire runs! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted October 27, 2009 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 They're rather nice - is that from an MSE etch? Yes, IIRC they are (I made two of these up back in May), but have just done another one from Brassmasters components (and have the burnt fingers to prove it!)... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suddaby Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Hi, There were articles in Model Railway Constructor in February and March 1982. Part of the Bodmin series by the North London Group. They quote 9ft for channel and 6ft for tube rodding. Kevin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RedgateModels Posted October 27, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 Yes, thanks for that - that's a useful measurement. I do have the requisite MSE castings for the signal wire runs! What's the part number Capt'n? - I ordered what I thought was the right thing (LS007) but turned out not to be what I expected...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 27, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 Something like this then? (still needs the two central pivots finishing off)... Yes, nice looking comp already set at a useful looking angle :icon_thumbsup2: Don't forget that in a run of rodding the length of rod pushing needs to be as near equal as makes not much difference to the length of rod which is pulling. Interested to hear from Penlan that the LNW went over to channel rodding at such an early date - I must dig out Foster and have a look - just did; slightly misleading in there regarding the latter BR use as the LNW/LMS channel rod, sometimes referred to as 'BS' (which it isn't), is narrower and lighter than the Western pattern. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 27, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2009 Economical Facing Point Lock from LNER textbook, showing single rod and rollers: Thanks to Mick Nicholson for the scan. More at: http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_post.php?post_id=4081 regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 As we are talking angle cranks etc... I've recently received some 4mm scale components, Brassmasters, Bill Bedford are marked, but I have a few frets without any markings on them, only AbleLable style stickers on the packets with the references SG024, SG023, SG012.... Does anyone know the origin of these please. Penlan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 .....I agree, Sandy, but given that we have now established that the MR would only have installed the one rodding run to work both point end and FPL, we are still left with just the one rodding run, once the FPL element has been removed...... Yes, I must try and keep up with the postings, to many diversions at this end. Penlan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted October 28, 2009 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 28, 2009 As a Midland modeller, albeit in 7mm I can confirm that the Midland always used round rodding which was in fact gas pipe which corroded badly on the inside so the LMS went onto the channel section. My Long Preston layout has full rodding on it and used stools at 6' centres. There isn't a great problem with curves as even a very tight railway curve (say 10 chains) is a very shallow curve.There are illustrations of Midland practice in 2 publications 1 is the long out of prinbt book called 'Midland Style ' by George Dow and the other source is various issues of Midland Record. I'm not near my set at the moment but if possible I will look at them and tell you which issues to look for. Most of the back issues are still available and will probably ben on sale on the Wild Swan stand at warley. Jamie Guest Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted October 28, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 28, 2009 CK, don't forget the signal wire posts too..... On straight runs I measured 24' feet apart from period photo's. Penlan Again one to watch, the LNWR favoured slack signal wires, other companies and later thinking preferred tight wires, not sure about the Midland, I'm a Crewe man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penlan Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 ......., I'm a Crewe man. As confirmed by the levers your pulling in the Avatar. Penlan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted October 28, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 28, 2009 As confirmed by the levers your pulling in the Avatar. Penlan Of course B) - although I've done LMS / GWR / BR / MR and others too ... but the LNWR stirrup was always my favourite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
signalmaintainer Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Wish I had something substantive to add to the topic. But please do let me say that I've had a heck of a lot of questions answered in just a few minutes. What an amazing bunch of knowledgable people on this forum.! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
10800 Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 I've looked at 10800's photos in the old forum of the SVR, Over here at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/topic/135-point-rodding-cranks-compensators-and-cables/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Bump. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I don't know why you've bumped this topic, but here's a copy from a blueprint from the 30s for the GWR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 (Tim - the reason Ozzyo bumped the topic was because there was an enquiry on this topic in another thread.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 But what was the new question? I thought that the Captain's original question had been answered! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 It wasn't a new question, Tim. In time-honoured RMweb fashion, it was the same question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Yep that was me. Got the info I need though in time honoured rmweb fashion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 It wasn't a new question, Tim. In time-honoured RMweb fashion, it was the same question. Tim, as Miss P. has said it was the same question that had been answered and as I was asking the question for a third party, rather than asking all of the possible questions again I thought lets just bump it up. Sometimes if you don't ask the search engine the right question you don't get the reply that you expect. As this thread was last posted into on 29/10/2009, it gave me and maybe a few more people some answers to some questions that have not been asked yet as well. So the next time do I just keep it to myself????????????????? Or should we all start to ask for all of these and similar questions to be joined together? We can all report any question and ask for two or more threads to be joined together, if we wish, I have done that in the past, maybe these ones should be joined together as well. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 2ManySpams Posted November 14, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 14, 2017 Just found this topic, very useful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium JDW Posted November 14, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 14, 2017 Bump. (Tim - the reason Ozzyo bumped the topic was because there was an enquiry on this topic in another thread.) It wasn't a new question, Tim. In time-honoured RMweb fashion, it was the same question. Tim, as Miss P. has said it was the same question that had been answered and as I was asking the question for a third party, rather than asking all of the possible questions again I thought lets just bump it up. Sometimes if you don't ask the search engine the right question you don't get the reply that you expect. As this thread was last posted into on 29/10/2009, it gave me and maybe a few more people some answers to some questions that have not been asked yet as well. So the next time do I just keep it to myself????????????????? Or should we all start to ask for all of these and similar questions to be joined together? We can all report any question and ask for two or more threads to be joined together, if we wish, I have done that in the past, maybe these ones should be joined together as well. OzzyO. This is indeed an interesting and useful thread, and I probably wouldn't have looked had it not been "bumped", as it isn't something that's useful for me, more an interestind diversion. Especially the mechanical drawings above, I always find that kind of thing fascinating. But I have to admit I wondered why too - its a fair point that some searches might not throw it up, or to refer someone here, but better "netiquette" would have been to say why, or maybe post that a new similar discussion had been opened in another thread, rather than just make a redundant post saying "bump" which is meaningless to most other readers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.