GWR + MR Rural Canal Wharf, c.1900

[LBSC123]

9 hours ago, Schooner said:

Sensible and completable he said; making use of RTP for an achievable end-point in the available time he said; shed based on commercially available trusses he said...

 

Well, he obviously talks bal-......ogne!

 

First stab at the shed. As with the bridge, just a sketch to get my ideas down and start working them out - feedback of any kind appreciated. Not really ready for public consumption, but posted with ulterior motives in another thread and so shared here too:

 

 

Based on the framing for one of the early transit sheds in the West India Docks () largely because I couldn't find decent drawings for railway-related sheds* with the kind of attributes I'm after. As with all things, pointers welcome  

 

Timber framed, tin roofed. Skylight down the centreline, and perhaps a window in the end - would these have been glass panels? - if it doesn't make the thing look too posh. As previously threatened, one side shortened for a bit of variety. Should the side panel be extended down another 4-5mm? The other side (open to the front of the layout) will be protected by canvas dodgers (rolled up to let the sunshine (and sightlines) in - a nod to Ingleford's perpetual beautiful Spring morning until I get round to a lighting rig). Crane is a suggestion only, and would be right at the edge of the layout (possibly forming the stop to prevent loose stock rolling off the edge in case of surprise).

 

The real question I have is whether this is the right route to go down at all? Would there be an end-loading dock butting on to a shed - even one so open? Is there room for some tarpaulin'd crates etc against the wall without blocking access for porters trying to unload a van in the 'loading dock road'? What is the point in the timber trestle platofrm, and how would it have been used? etc etc etc... Hopefully this process will sort some of those questions, but if you have an opinion please share it!

 

Gale-induced inactivity, hence the time to get pencil and paper involved. Enjoyable and useful process, hopefully more to come...

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

*Currently away from home and books, so totally internet-reliant. Sub-optimal.

 

Hi Schooner, I like the look of the shed, I think it’ll be a lovely feature.

 

With regard to some of the questions, I think it’ll work nicely but I often find with these things it’s just a case of seeing how it looks on the layout and making it look prototypical etc.

 

Keep up the good work, the sea air must be doing something...! 

[Mikkel]

14 hours ago, Schooner said:

Of those three, top two Hungerford last one  Tavistock. If any are of particular interest I'd be happy to provide all the info I can. Definate potential there...and 'Farthingford' has a certain ring to it...

 

 

Many thanks, the photos have been stored in the inspiration folder. I have nothing tangible on the drawing board, but projects like yours are so inspirational. There are one or two GWR canal wharves in Tony Atkins' Great Western Docks and Marine, but photos are scarce. 

[Schooner]

9 hours ago, SteveyDee68 said:

keep them entirely at the rear and don't attempt to mix in more scale buildings

 

A helpful suggestion, thank you. I think this is doable on the RHS of the layout (the 'Old Wharf') - the buildings are all Bachmann and you're right that their reduced stature helps the scene feel a little bigger than it is.

 

This approach, applied to the LHS, suggests that I lose the Bachmann Grain Warehouse, which doesn't blend with the much more appealing JSM Small Warehouse. Perhaps it could be replaced with something made from the Skytrex offerings (the footprints can be made to work without difficulty)...but I'm not convinced. See @LBSC123's comment below.

 

At this rate, the project will be full of lovely scratch buildings which exist only hypothetically, the very thing I was keen to avoid at the outset.

 

10 hours ago, LBSC123 said:

...it’s just a case of seeing how it looks on the layout...

Very true, a necessary and timely reminder. In fact, I've given up trying to square the Pendon barn with the longer siding in SCARM. Sod it, I'll just make the best choice I can when it comes time to place the actual thing on the actual baseboard

 

If the choice bothers me in five years' time then double sod it, I'll just change it  

 

3 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

...I have nothing tangible on the drawing board...

...and I have nothing tangible off it!

 

You are, as ever, too kind. I'm pleased that some of these bits and pieces have been of wider interest. Your point about the pitfalls of fictional locations is well made. The research required to make a good go of it, even before any modelling starts, is intimidating...but enticing  Farthing is, of course, a stand-out example of both skillsets. 

 

It's worth perhaps mentioning the utility of Trainz (etc) in working through some of the operational questions thrown up by invented locations. I really don't know much about the railways, and so it's useful to have a tool which allows 'first hand' discovery of why the thing I've just done is stupid! It's certainly been invaluable to the cohesion/coherence of the Docklands scheme.

 

A little light relief:

Newdigate's coal wharf in the '50s, embedded from the wonderful Warwickshire Railways. Irrelevant, but evocative.

 

This evening's news:

This evening, there is no news, other than I've learned how to change the title of the thread. Doesn't exactly trip of the tongue, but given the last name I came up with was the SN&T&SC&RC (tongue firmly lodged in cheek) I think we all got away lightly...

 

Cheers all,

 

Schooner

 

 

 

[Schooner]

I've got a little leave, and Hattons have been in touch. There's a slight risk this will be the last Planning post...

 

Sorry for the lack of explanatory pics, limited time available atm, so hopefully the following makes sense. A quick reality-check please:

 

• The baseboard will be built out of 10mm foamboard. It will live (for now) on top of a folding table, 1600x600mm. The support will be a box, of doubled foamboard, and braced. The 'inner' box to match the table dimensions, with the extra layout outside of this and extending down c.10mm to form a lip which can slot over the tabletop to hold the layout securely in place.

Pros: extra security for the joins in each long side (the foamboard being <1600m); extra security of the whole layout; extra 20mm each way  

Cons: Potentially reduces ability to move the layout to other locations, but looking at other foamboard projects on RMWeb I think it would be okay just resting on those extended sides from time to time.

 

 

• The short ends will be cut away for the canal (c.25mm, TBC), then 3 x braces cut to match and fitted at 400mm intervals. I had originally planned to cross-brace, but think this may be quicker, easier and plenty strong enough. If in any doubt, cross-bracing can be added without too much hassle. Webs fitted at all intersections

 

• The baseboard proper will then be cut to fit the wharf footprint at the higher level, and the canal bed at the lower. Cut and fit, but not glued down yet. Foam underlay put down (over most of the wharf, not just under the rails) and a 100mmx100mm grid marked out on to the foam, then the layout plan marked out likewise.

 

• Lay the pointwork over the template; mark for point motors.

 

• Remove baseboard, flip, and fit point motors, servos and control boards, and wiring runs (inc power feed to track, at the RH end of the RH points).

 

• Mark and notch the braces to accept the wiring runs (the motors etc should be clear).

 

• Baseboard back up the right way, and secured back on top of the 'box'. Structual engineering complete!

 

• Lay track, using transferred track centres from template/layout plan as a guide.

 

• Power up, test.

 

 

No plan survives contact with the enemy  bl**dy anything, and I'm not expecting this one to, but with time being perpetually tight I'm keen to avoid the properly rookie mistakes. Where is this plan likely to come unstuck?

 

Thank you all once again for the help. Wouldn't have got here on my tod!

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

 

 

 

[Compound2632]

On 11/02/2021 at 23:15, Schooner said:

A little light relief:

Newdigate's coal wharf in the '50s, embedded from the wonderful Warwickshire Railways. Irrelevant, but evocative.

 

I do think this:

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/misc/misc_newd265.htm

 

would make an interesting model!

[bgman]

18 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I do think this:

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/misc/misc_newd265.htm

 

would make an interesting model!

 

It'd make shunting manoeuvres interesting !

[Schooner]

@Compound2632 Now you tell me!

[Mikkel]

Oooh, that looks good. Nice use of foamboard.   I remember reading some of Keith Harcourt's articles on "The Kappaboard Railway", and how he had to always ensure people that, yes, this stuff really can be quite sturdy as long as it's well braced. 

[imt]

That looks very interesting.  How do you make straight cuts in foambord.  I made a layout using 5mm and had troubles with straight edges - let alone curves.  Foam board is plenty robust for small layouts adn mine worked fine. A bit of Scakscenes harbour wall too.  I cannot imagine getting through 10mm stff with a Stanley knife and a straighedge.

[Schooner]

@imt Tools used:

+ pencil + glue gun. 

 

The foamboard I used  is faced with a paper (possibly even plastic film), which will have helped the knife to grip, but the foam cut very cleanly: every kink and woggle in the plastic ruler I used before re-discovering the metal one faithfully transferred!

 

Going round again I would use:

• 60cm metal ruler (mine's at work and was missed)
• Copydex (eg) instead of a hot glue gun - slower, but I didn't have enough weights or clamps to hand to make sure everything set flush, fair and square against the force of the glue. Needless to say, the end result is none of the above!
• The knife worked well - 3 or 4 runs along a straight edge gave a nice clean cut - but I'm more at home with slightly heavier bits of kit and would probably go with that.

No matter, no going back now!

 

I'm happy enough with the end result. It's feather-light, very rigid and plenty strong enough. In time I may add to the bracing but only because I'll have leftover board rather than because I need to

 

The plan previously posted was a useful guide, and I got a fair way down it: the frame work is complete, as is the canal bed and baseboard proper (the latter just layed loose over the former in last night's pic). The foam underlay is glued down too.

 

Next time, hopefully I should have all the required points so it'll be on to electrics and track laying. 

 

I'll draw a line under this post then, and call the planning stage over (as if!). Further updates will be over in my Pre-Grouping thread for now. 

 

Thank you all for the support and guidance. You've been incredibly helpful. Thank you.

 

Rightwell, cheers and gone!

 

Schooner

 

Edited March 2, 2021 by Schooner
Link updated

[Mikkel]

Link not working I think, did you mean this thread:

 

 

[Schooner]

I did, thank you. In fact, see this post for the latest:

 

I'll edit the link in the previous too, thanks for the heads up @Mikkel

 

[Antony Farrell]

Just wondering as to how close to the edge of the quay would you place the track. Was there a recommended distance?

[Schooner]

I don't think there was a hard and fast rule, but for smaller quays like this between 6' and 10' feet between quay edge and rail edge is common. Outliers either side, but that range is typical. 

 

For this plan I'm at the top end of that range 'tho I didn't want to move the track, in order to keep the radius as high as possible, or the quayside, on the grounds that it's easier to remove material than add it  

 

Hope that helps!

[Nearholmer]

Where loads were tipped direct from wagon to barge, typically on NG mineral lines, the "near" rail was often almost at the very edge of the wharf.

 

If you look through these photos, you can see the vestiges of rails, which are still there now http://www.cosgrovehistory.co.uk/doc/tour/t24.html .The formation is a triangle, with one side along the wharf, and the track from the apex going to the gravel pits.

 

(the person who wrote the caption has clearly never heard of the term "railway wagon", let alone "vee skip"!)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Compound2632]

Whereas at Great Yarmouth, standard gauge, there's plenty of space for stacking goods being transhipped between the two modes:

 

 

[Image posted by @Londontram in the Castle Aching topic.]

[Flying Pig]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Whereas at Great Yarmouth, standard gauge, there's plenty of space for stacking goods being transhipped between the two modes:

 

Yarmouth really looking like it has sneaked across the North Sea from a more Continental location in that picture.

[Schooner]

Thanks to the support and help found here, and elsewhere on RMWeb, I think everything is now in place for this plan to become reality!