Amanda's 7mm Stuff - A 1366T takes shape - and runs!

[Pacific231G]

9 minutes ago, WM183 said:

Well. 

Baseboards have been hung! Three sections, each one 122 x 50 cm (4 feet x 20 inches) have been installed on our brackets. That gives us 12 feet, 3.66 m. Evidently, I cannot measure, because the wall I can use for this is 13 feet long, not 14 feet. That loss of a foot *hurts*. My kingdom for another 4' board. I need to make up the remaining 30 cm of board somehow, though mechanically this is pretty simple. 

Any dreams of trains of more than two coaches - and realistically, one with tail traffic - are probably gone here. Two coaches plus a tank engine is 4 of my 12 feet.  I was using 60' scale length (LMS coaches are 57' long, plus 3' buffers etc) as a size measurement. It is still not impossible, but probably a quart in a pint jar at this point.  A shunting type layout a la Arun Quay, or perhaps something grotty and urban, seems to be the ticket now.

Off to measure stuff some more!

 

Amanda

Hi Amanda

The lost foot is frustrating  (it actually makes a huge difference to my own current plans in H0) but not a show stopper.

If you want a shunting layout or a grotty urban yard then fine but if what you really want is a complete terminus with both passenger trains and enough goods shunting to keep you busy then I don't actually  think you have a problem. 

Maybe look again at the Piano but you've anyway got room for a conventional BLT to fiddle yard and I reckon you could handle a two coach train with a tail load quite comfortably. 

I'm looking at the GOG's Small Layouts vol 2 now - I also have vol 1 but it's hiding. Apart from the two 'pianos'- Tony Collins' Goonhilly, which is  nine feet long, and Maurice Daniels' Clock Abbot which is 11ft 3ins-  I can see John Berry's Bassetts Castle which is eight feet long plus  a 3ft 10 inch sector plust fiddle yard and . Dave Cox's Wantage  (probable too specific) which has a total length of eleven foot three (to fit in an elevent foot six room) Remember that the run round loop only has to be long enough to accomodate the train less the locomotive.

(Let me know if you want PMs of any or all of those plans)

 

[Ray H]

You could replace the point and plain line beyond it at the end of the platform with a sector plate just long enough for your largest loco. That would regain you some length to use elsewhere or to replace what you thought you had but don't.

[Guest WM183]

HRedacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[David Bell]

Amanda,

 

All looking good. I think 2021 will be the year where you settle your course and head forward. Have a great Christmas and all the best for the New Year.

Cheers

David

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[Western Star]

Access this web page...

 

https://djb-model-rly-articles.blogspot.com/

 

and then look for this text - detailing articles with plans by Michael Longridge from Model Railway News in early 1950s...

 

                                Great Western Coach Drawings -- No.12

Feb. 1952    54ft  Clerestory Third.                                                                           PDF

[end quote]

 

regards, Graham

  

[daifly]

Alternatively, go straight here

Dave

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[Northroader]

BRM ran an article by Mr. Tony Bagwell in January 1995, entitled “7mm modelling on the cheap”, in which he described how he financed and built a small O gauge layout. It was a fairly close copy of Hemyock, excluding the dairy end, which he called “Perlycombe”, using Peco track and points. It had an attractive appearance and featured at several exhibitions, but I’m afraid I can’t find a link to it anywhere, and I’m a bit diffident about posting pictures out of the magazine willy nilly. Anyhow, I’ve got a sketch of the layout plan which shouldn’t upset anyone:

[David Bell]

9 hours ago, WM183 said:

 

Thank you!

I admit, as I look at these clerestories and at brightly coloured pre grouping goods stock I am debating rolling back to 1915 or so...

If you do that you can go for even shorter coaches, then problem solved.

Cheers

David

[Northroader]

I gather Slaters do their kits with preprinted sides now. No, I’m not an agent.

https://slatersplastikard.com/linePage.php?code=7C07

[Pacific231G]

17 hours ago, WM183 said:

 

Thank you!

I admit, as I look at these clerestories and at brightly coloured pre grouping goods stock I am debating rolling back to 1915 or so...

I don't think stations changed all that much between the Edwardian era and nationalisation (Tavistock LSWR was stilll gas lit in 1967 ) so you could always run more than one era but the period of the 1930s that Pendon is set in seems a pretty good bet for running a wide range of stock and the panniers built as such are all AFAIK post grouping . We know of course that at least two brake end clerestories were still running until 1950. 

I'll have a delver through my MRNs to see if there are any drawings of clerestory brake ends.

There are. PM on its way

 

Edited December 24, 2020 by Pacific231G

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[brossard]

Always exciting to design a new layout.  Have you seen the offerings from Lcut? 

 

http://lcut.co.uk/index.php?page=pages/hub&title=LCC Bundles&gauge=O

 

I have used several of these on my layout, suitably embellished.

 

Peco turnout templates are also useful.

 

Skytrex do some nice things:  https://www.ogauge.co.uk/36-cranes

 

John

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[brossard]

Happy to know you will build your own turnouts.  All but one of mine are handbuilt and the sole Peco Y turnout is modified.  Standard Peco turnouts are quite long with a long fouling distance.  I made my station crossover by blowing up Peco 00 small radius turnout templates (199% instead of 175%).  The gauge difference means that these proportion to something a bit larger than a #5.

 

John

Edited December 24, 2020 by brossard

[hartleymartin]

On 24/12/2020 at 08:33, Northroader said:

BRM ran an article by Mr. Tony Bagwell in January 1995, entitled “7mm modelling on the cheap”, in which he described how he financed and built a small O gauge layout. It was a fairly close copy of Hemyock, excluding the dairy end, which he called “Perlycombe”, using Peco track and points. It had an attractive appearance and featured at several exhibitions, but I’m afraid I can’t find a link to it anywhere, and I’m a bit diffident about posting pictures out of the magazine willy nilly. Anyhow, I’ve got a sketch of the layout plan which shouldn’t upset anyone:

 

There is a British-outline layout to this track plan built in O gauge called "Dibley" here in Australia. I've met the builder of that layout and his son - both are into O scale model railways and I believe that one of them is sometimes found on this forum. As I recall, the layout is about the size shown in your diagram, though it has been at least 5 years since I saw the layout.

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[Guest WM183]

ÍRedacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[brossard]

Lovely picture Amanda.  So are you rethinking the use of passenger stock?  Certainly an all goods layout would work very well for your layout size.

 

John

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[brossard]

Well, if you want to build coaches, then do so.  It's your hobby and you get to do what you want.

 

I think I've said before that freight ops have more interest than passenger.  Most of us include a station in our layouts and I'm no exception.

 

It's hard to make the final irrevocable decision because then we are stuck with it for probably years to come.

 

John

[Guest WM183]

Redacted

Edited April 12, 2023 by WM183
Redacted

[Pacific231G]

On 26/12/2020 at 16:19, WM183 said:

Hi John,

I dunno. I mean... I want to build coaches too, simply because I like them! But I must say the layouts that have made the biggest impacts on me - Arun Quay, Cwm Bach, Napier Street, the Sheep Fellow's 4mm layouts, and many others - tend to be busy goods-focused layouts with narrow clearances and lots of wagons to bother. 

That and I really want to build a 56xx. 

Amanda

It's a very personal decision. I really like Arun Quay too but somehow for me a railway with either no passengers (as in much of N. America) or no goods seems somehow incomplete. A BLT with a particularly grungy factory siding where unspeakable things are being done to large lumps of metal  or a down at heel harbour line hiding the fiddle yard perhaps?

 

2 hours ago, WM183 said:

I have done the few final repairs and touchups to 5717, and decided today to begin weathering. I think it will not get much grungier than this; used but not neglected!

I'm remembering the Pannier tank that we used to see at Wolvercote crossing north of Oxford on the empty blanket express to Witney long after that line closed to passengers. It clanked horribly -some of the bearings had clearly  seen better days- and steam issued from every pore but I don't think it ever got any grungier than your 5717. Maybe a few streaks from where water dribbled and some coal dust around the bunker but not generally any muckier. There was also a particular patina that steam locos acquired when they were being cleaned with oily rags and were well overdue  for the new paint job they'd never get.

The sounds it made will probably never find its way onto a chip as you'd never find a loco now in such a worn mechanical state. 

Edited December 27, 2020 by Pacific231G