GCR track. Advice needed.

[Haggerleases]

Hello all. 

As quite a raw newcomer to railway modelling, I have a few questions regarding track. Can you help? 

After much reading and a few false starts I have narrowed down my choice of what to model to either the GCR, or L&Y. (I was going to do the M&SWJR, but discounted it as possibly beyond me at this point in time).

I am a member of the EM gauge society, and to get something running quite soon, which I think is important, I have ordered some EM flexi track. My period of interest is late 1890s to early 1900s, so my EM flexi is too long (moulded for 60' panels instead of 45') and sleepers too short (8'6"instead of 9')

Do you think this can be disguised somehow? Crafty ballasting?

My aim is to build the rest of the track myself using the EM gauge society templates and so on, but like I said, I just want to get something up and running for now.

Any suggestions as to how best to attempt use the society flexi track for this period? or am I better off just being patient and carrying on with my current glacial pace of building handbuilt track. 

[Andy Hayter]

In the end it will depend on what you want to achieve.  For me the mismatch between plain track and point work would irk and I don't think you can hide this by burying the sleepers under ballast.

 

From my limited experience in track building in H0, I would suggest that you build a template / jig for standard track.  A long straight to demark the end of sleepers with guides for you sleepers at right angles.  Set your sleepers.  Glue or solder one rail.  For straight track continue to the second rail.  For curved track, demount from the jig and place in situ, then solder/glue the second rail.

 

I found I could build at least 30 inches (75cm) track in a short evening.

[t-b-g]

I have an EM Gauge layout which has two 5ft long baseboards. One was reclaimed from an earlier layout and has C & L flexible track with 8ft 6ins sleepers plus handmade points based on a 9ft sleeper length. The new board has all home made plain track with 9ft sleepers plus points.

 

Despite the mixture, when ballasted and painted with a consistent colour, I had the layout to over a dozen shows and nobody ever noticed.

 

I think the question comes down to what compromises an individual is willing to accept. Do you want to lay track that is a near match or track that is as close as you can make it to the track used by the actual company.

 

You have probably seen the drawings on here already but I am adding a link just in case.

 

https://www.oldpway.info/opw_drawings.html#MSLR_dwgs

 

The GCR points were quite distintive with their mostly 14" wide sleepers and the lengths going up in 1ft intervals instead of 6" like most railways.

 

Cutting the webs and adjusting the sleeper spacings to suit the plain track isn't too much of a task and does make a difference.

 

The photo shows some EM gauge GNR track that I am working on at the moment. It shows the wide variation in sleeper spacing.

 

 

 

[micknich2003]

Look on this site, plenty of interesting stuff.

 

oldpway Old Railway Permanent Way

[Haggerleases]

Hi chaps. Thank you for your advice.

TBG, as the custodian of the Rev Peter Denny's layout, I'm a little in awe of someone who owns a model I've read so much about. I've tried to get my hands on every book and every magazine article that Rev. Denny wrote. It's such inspiring stuff. 

I really want to model the GCR, but I fear anything I do will be a pale facsimile of what Rev Denny achieved. That is why the L&Y was my other consideration. 

I know I will have to make compromises at some point, but I really want to get the track right, so at this early stage there is still time to re-think things. I love the GCR and have collected lots of books on the company, but I worry I'll not do it justice. Such a lovely countryside it ran through, and such handsome locomotives. I'm so keen to crack on, but at this time frustratingly my ambitions far outstrip my minimal knowledge and ability! 

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

21 minutes ago, Haggerleases said:

Hi chaps. Thank you for your advice.

TBG, as the custodian of the Rev Peter Denny's layout, I'm a little in awe of someone who owns a model I've read so much about. I've tried to get my hands on every book and every magazine article that Rev. Denny wrote. It's such inspiring stuff. 

I really want to model the GCR, but I fear anything I do will be a pale facsimile of what Rev Denny achieved. That is why the L&Y was my other consideration. 

I know I will have to make compromises at some point, but I really want to get the track right, so at this early stage there is still time to re-think things. I love the GCR and have collected lots of books on the company, but I worry I'll not do it justice. Such a lovely countryside it ran through, and such handsome locomotives. I'm so keen to crack on, but at this time frustratingly my ambitions far outstrip my minimal knowledge and ability! 

 

 

 

 

Buckingham was certainly influential in my modelling choices too. No need to be an awe of me, I am just the lucky bloke who ended up with it! 

 

If it helps your decision making, Peter Denny built entirely generic track, with nothing specifically relating it to the GCR at all.

 

My way of looking at it is that if I was building a small layout, I would do the points to GCR drawings and build the plain track using 9ft sleepers at the correct spacings.

 

If I was building something more ambitious, I would use bought flexible plain track, perhaps altering the panel lengths to give a better general appearance but I would be willing to compromise on the sleeper length to save a huge amount of time.

 

The points I would still build to the GCR sleepering arrangements.

 

The layout photographed above is only 8ft long, so doing the plain track wasn't too bad as there were only about 5 yards in total to make.

 

 

[Haggerleases]

Thanks so much for the advice. It may seem a little thing, but this may potentially be the effort of decades, so I would like to form my standards at the start. What I'm prepared to accept, and what i wont tolerate.

I love history and industrial archaeology, so if i can do justice in model form to the people who built the real thing, within the constraints of a full time job and a young family, I'll be happy. 

I think I need to write down clear outlines of what I want the finished model to look like, and what I'm prepared to compromise on. 

This has been the result of getting on for 4 to 5 years of research, book collecting, heartache and indecision, but I keep getting drawn to the beautiful GCR, and I guess it's best to follow the muse! 

I never expected it to be this hard! What scale, what gauge, what period etc, there is simply so much out there to like, it would take several lifetimes to do it all, and I'm only blessed with one, so choose I must. 

I do think the GCR is where I will stay, but I need to set the bounds of what I will find acceptable in order for me to relax and enjoy it. You are often your own hardest critic! 

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by Haggerleases
Spelling

[bécasse]

4 hours ago, Haggerleases said:

My period of interest is late 1890s to early 1900s, so my EM flexi is too long (moulded for 60' panels instead of 45') and sleepers too short (8'6"instead of 9').

 

The MS&LR (which became the GCR) used 30 foot track panels, not 45 foot. It shouldn't be impossible to move sleepers around on the flexi track by cutting the webs between them. It's also possible to widen the sleepers by glueing a piece of 40 thou black plasticard at each end. The most obvious discrepancy is likely to be the chairs which are probably quite different to those used by the MS&LR/GCR - but it will probably only be spotted by someone who is interested in the history of permanent way.

[t-b-g]

8 minutes ago, bécasse said:

The MS&LR (which became the GCR) used 30 foot track panels, not 45 foot. It shouldn't be impossible to move sleepers around on the flexi track by cutting the webs between them. It's also possible to widen the sleepers by glueing a piece of 40 thou black plasticard at each end. The most obvious discrepancy is likely to be the chairs which are probably quite different to those used by the MS&LR/GCR - but it will probably only be spotted by someone who is interested in the history of permanent way.

 

Drawings also exist for a 36ft panel on the oldpway.info site. The 30ft was from the 1890s and was in line with common practise at that time.The 36ft would be most likely what was in use for the time of construction of the London Extension as it seems that MS&LR drawings show 30ft and GCR ones 36ft. Whether they went on to using 45ft, which was common for many railways, at a later date is something I don't recall seeing but I wouldn't rule it out. Rails did get longer as manufacturing techniques improved. 

 

 

[PenrithBeacon]

C&L do 4 bolt chairs cat no SKU 4CH101D