Jump to content
 

Gill Head: Kirkby Luneside's neighbour


Physicsman
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
29 minutes ago, BWsTrains said:

Andy, enough!

 

Please don't impose your own rigorous standards on the rest of us :o

 

Colin

 

Just be grateful that he didn't include the 6 inch nails and 8 inch screws on the list - the latter requiring Allen keys to tighten them up.

 

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

  • RMweb Premium
25 minutes ago, BWsTrains said:

 

Jeff,

 

I probably missed it but are you putting stones on rear face? A lot of work for an area out of view.

 

Colin

 

Colin, have a look at the last pic of the first post tonight (now on page 20).

 

You are quite correct, it is a lot of work. But I actually - being a silly sod - feel guilty that I'm not covering each pier with stones to the zero level. Even though - as I commented earlier this evening - that doing so would be very stupid as they'd be below "ground".

 

Almost the same argument for not doing the back (East) side. A VERY unscientific reason, but it just wouldn't be "right" not to do the back - arch rings commenced ten hours ago.

 

It IS all a bit bonkers, but so was doing it in DAS.

 

On  the subject of which, both the underbridge and occupation bridge (see very first post in GH thread) will be DAS-builds.

 

Jeff

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
25 minutes ago, Rowsley17D said:

Looking fantastic, Jeff. You must be vey proud of your achievement in building such a solid-looking structure.

 

I'm very pleased with progress, though I do find it amusing when I think it took 6 weeks to convert the garage, and it's now taken 6 weeks just to clad the piers with stones!

 

I'm also amazed that I'm not getting fed up with the process. Maybe that tells me I'm satisfied with the way things have gone.

 

Jeff

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, lambiedg said:

Looking better by the day. Really great work.

I especially liked your invention of the hump-backed viaduct in the “panorama” shot.

 

Sorry couldn’t resist the frippery.

 

More pictures are always a treat

 

Yes, David.

 

The hump-backed viaduct was my practice bridge. I needed a few weeks of stone-cladding to "warm up"!!

 

:no::no:

 

Jeff

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

20 hours ago, Physicsman said:

Almost the same argument for not doing the back (East) side. A VERY unscientific reason, but it just wouldn't be "right" not to do the back - arch rings commenced ten hours ago.

 

 

One day in the future you will go round the back with your camera and will be very glad you did those arches.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, mark axlecounter said:

That viaduct looks amazing. 
I think I may have to Jeff-nap you to build one on my layout :D

 

Mark T 

 

Mark, I ought to go into business building the damn things!

 

Bodgit has already tried to commission me to build him an O gauge construction. I wonder if there's enough DAS in the land, given as it has to be imported from Italy.

 

Good to hear from you.

 

1 hour ago, Donington Road said:

 

One day in the future you will go round the back with your camera and will be very glad you did those arches.

 

Mick, your point is well taken - especially as there is a camera angle from just inside the door that looks along the back of the viaduct.

 

Jeff

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Having read this thread last night I just wanted to say how impressed I am with the build. I have been wanting to build a small photographic scene for my o gauge locos but couldn’t decide how to make it different to the usual embankment. Following  your inspiration I am going to use your methods for a bridge in the scene and see what happens!

Thank you for taking the time to document it in such detail. It’s really appreciated 

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, lankyandy said:

Having read this thread last night I just wanted to say how impressed I am with the build. I have been wanting to build a small photographic scene for my o gauge locos but couldn’t decide how to make it different to the usual embankment. Following  your inspiration I am going to use your methods for a bridge in the scene and see what happens!

Thank you for taking the time to document it in such detail. It’s really appreciated 

 

Hi Andy.

 

That is the kind of post that makes being on RMweb so worthwhile.

 

Thanks for your comments. If there's anything relevant to your build that needs further explanation just get in touch on here.

 

Jeff

 

Edited by Physicsman
ZPeLLchEKUR - AGEN AGEN!
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Update:

 

I've now built and attached 4 arch rings to the East face. So that makes 12 of the 16 done. A 5th ring is half-completed and will be fitted tomorrow afternoon.

 

Since Colin asked about the rear of the structure, and using it as a thin excuse to post a pic, find one duly attached.

 

I also couldn't resist the latest update on THAT pic, now that the 3 relevant arches have both West and East arch rings.

 

Jeff

 

EDIT: WELL, that went well. I cropped the second image, deleted the original and now we have BOTH. Along with the ongoing ZPellcheckerrrrrrrrrrrr problems, I sometimes feel I'm going crackers when I post on here!!

 

EDIT 2: I woke up this morning to find the duplicate has gone. I wonder if Wizard Andy York has been this way - OR was it all a figment of my EvoStik-affected imagination?!!

 

 

IMG_7821rs.jpg

IMG_7823.JPG

IMG_7823crop.jpg

Edited by Physicsman
Cropping second image/contemplating reality
  • Like 15
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Monday evening we were watching "The Architecture the Railways Built" Ep 4 which featured the S&C. It made it here to Oz quickly only having aired last May in the UK (Yesterday/UKTV). For any who missed it well worth going back to explore as there are in detail looks at the building and restoration of Ribblehead as well as the various MR Building types found along the line. If I was not mistaken there was even a fleeting glimpse of AG at one point?

 

Colin

 

 

 

 

Edited by BWsTrains
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, lambiedg said:

It just keeps getting better and better.

Now to lob in a spanner......

Am I the only one who prefers the look of the curve from non-viewing side?

 

Where did I put my coat.............

 

Morning David.

 

You're probably not the only one who prefers that angle. Of course, front and back are nearly identical, aside from the rear having slightly wider piers because of the curve. My model has an accentuated curve in order to fit in with the rest of the layout.

 

Published images tend to be evenly split, East or West. I just wish I had the space to put the viaduct in the middle of the room so I could model the valley on either side.

 

Jeff

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Right, David. Since you prefer the reverse view, and since nearly all of my pics are of the West face, here's a "treat" for you!

 

J.

 

 

20210119_184957cur.jpg

20210119_185034cur.jpg

20210119_185116cur.jpg

Edited by Physicsman
Capital letter
  • Like 12
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, lambiedg said:

A treat indeed! 

 

I’m not really sure why I prefer the convex curve. It just pleases my eye more.

 

The "reason" is probably the same as why I prefer the concave curve.

 

Whatever that reason is! :D

 

Jeff

 

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

  • RMweb Premium

Good evening.  I have started working through a single arch bridge in o gauge, and  I’m just planning out stone production. Have you tried adding texture to the stones? Looking at the size of stones I will be using, I think it may be needed. 
just wondering if you have tried anything with any success. One thought I had was to make a version of your ‘mould’ but on a  textured floor tile giving it a slightly rough surface? 
viaduct is looking great and planning out one small arch really starts to put into perspective just how much work is involved! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, lankyandy said:

Good evening.  I have started working through a single arch bridge in o gauge, and  I’m just planning out stone production. Have you tried adding texture to the stones? Looking at the size of stones I will be using, I think it may be needed. 
just wondering if you have tried anything with any success. One thought I had was to make a version of your ‘mould’ but on a  textured floor tile giving it a slightly rough surface? 
viaduct is looking great and planning out one small arch really starts to put into perspective just how much work is involved! 

 

Hi Andy.

 

I haven't overtly tried to put any texture onto the stones, though a fair proportion end up with a non-smooth surface as the clay is rolled out into strips.

 

I think your idea is the best approach - to try to put texture on at the moulding stage. Dried DAS is very brittle and can easily break apart if any roughing-up is done after the clay has set.

 

I'm modelling at 4mm scale. For a much smaller number of 7mm blocks, as in your case, it might be worth building the jig using the floor tile as the base. A lot of my stones, representing 4 foot by 2 foot are still a bit small to show texture to scale. Irregularities might look like the stones had been in the middle of a war zone, with a 1mm "dimple" representing a 3 inch imprint in the surface. For you, in O gauge, the corresponding block would be 28 x 14mm, which is sizeable and your surface mottling might look ok.

 

I'm pleased I've sown the seeds of an idea in your mind. Some people would suggest scribing the DAS, but I think individual blocks, if not built overscale, look much better. Biased opinion of course!

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/01/2021 at 09:20, lankyandy said:

Have you tried adding texture to the stones?

 

You could try dabbing the face of the stones with a toothbrush. I have seen it done in another context (

, but I think it would work well in the larger scales.

 

Sorry, but I could not paste an unobtrusive link without bringing in the graphics. The toothbrush is at 1’15”.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 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...