Jump to content

Eastwood Town - You wait ages for one, then two come along......


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

If the storage area is operated as carriage sidings doesn't that mean that, effectively, every train on the ECML has to terminate at and depart from Eastwood Town?

Or to put it another way trains can't just pass through on their way to somewhere else, Edinburgh, London or wherever?

 

 

Ah, now you're taking me into areas I don't even think about.......:D

 

I'm just a big kid who enjoys watching trains that remind me of my youth. I can suspend belief easily and trains that come from storage will run a few full circuits, so at that point they are through trains. Once I fancy a change they will stop at ET and make their way to storage.

 

Pick up any magazine and you will often see beautiful photographs which show the expertise of the photographer, but the rest is often your imagination. A train stopped in a station is one thing, but add a caption that says the 10.00 non stop express from Kings Cross arrives in Platform 1at Eastwood Town behind Gresley A4 Kingfisher and suddenly you can see the journey the train has made. The reality that it may have made a tortuous journey to get into that platform isn't apparent from the information provided.

 

Of course, I have nothing but admiration for Retford/Little Bytham/Peterborough North/Grantham and their prototypical accuracy and I wish I had that self discipline. My audience will be friends and family plus grandkids and they know even less than I do about the ECML from the 60's and yet they will enjoy seeing trains run around the room without stalling or needing the hand of God.

 

The strange thing is my wife is always accusing me of stopping and rewinding a programme to check the make/model and number plate of a car or some other detail, yet somehow that doesn't extend to my love of railways. I can just enjoy them as they are and generally see the big picture rather than detail.

 

Of course I don't want obvious howlers, hence my questions to give me ideas how to deal with an issue. 

 

Please be assured it's nothing personal, Phil, but felt I ought to explain why these things don't always seem matters of priority to me.

 

I realise I must be a huge disappointment or lost cause to many (or maybe not) as I don't think along the same lines (apologies for the pun).

 

I tell myself to stick with it as a beautiful swan may emerge one day. One the other hand it could yet be another ugly duckling.....:D

  • Like 3
  • Agree 5
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Round of applause 3
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

That doesn't have to be a problem, Phil. Go back to the old (circa 1930s) ways.

 

A train comes out of storage to start its journey. At that point, ET is, say, King's Cross. After a few laps the train passes through Peterborough, Grantham, Doncaster, York, etc. until it finishes its journey at Edinburgh and returns to storage. The train calls at some of these stations while others would be passed non-stop.

 

Granted, the station nameboards would read ET every time but all it needs is a little imagination, which as railway modellers we are never short of.

 

You beat me to it......:D

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
11 minutes ago, gordon s said:

 

Ah, now you're taking me into areas I don't even think about.......:D

 

Please be assured it's nothing personal, Phil, but felt I ought to explain why these things don't always seem matters of priority to me.

 

 

No problem - I'm just making suggestions in the spirit of helping you figure out a solution that works for you.

 

We're very much on the same wavelength about the whole point of the exercise and I'm fully on board with the idea of imagining your one modelled station represents several up and down the line as a train runs around.

 

 

Personally I would have more of problem with my through station standing in for the big city terminii but that's just me. (And it's the cause of my own dilemmas when I'm designing my own layouts!) :wink_mini:

 

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

I have long admired your vision regarding track plans.
 

Just a shame we didn’t get in touch years ago when I had a blank sheet of paper......:drinks:

Edited by gordon s
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

With 5 through platforms and no junction station it seems obvious that 2 of them would be treated as terminal platforms. Otherwise why would you need so many? So trains depart from one of them, do several laps through the other platforms, and finally terminate in the other terminal platform. Or even the same one.

 

The train engines come and go from the MPD, while a fleet of these bring and fetch the coaches from the carriage sidings for them:

IMG_4995sep17.jpg

linked from https://images.railsofsheffield.com

 

It's all good fun, and you can leave trains circulating on the main lines while you do the preparing and breaking up of trains, and turn the train engines.

 

If only the station pilot locos visit the carriage sidings, they don't need a turntable.

 

The only mystery remaining is why do traders photograph trains standing on a glass plate instead of a length of track? It makes them look daft.

 

Martin.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

The only mystery remaining is why do traders photograph trains standing on a glass plate instead of a length of track? It makes them look daft.

 

Maybe (many years ago) to say "ooh look, we've put flanges on the middle wheelset" ?

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

With 5 through platforms and no junction station it seems obvious that 2 of them would be treated as terminal platforms. Otherwise why would you need so many? So trains depart from one of them, do several laps through the other platforms, and finally terminate in the other terminal platform. Or even the same one.

 

The train engines come and go from the MPD, while a fleet of these bring and fetch the coaches from the carriage sidings for them:

IMG_4995sep17.jpg

linked from https://images.railsofsheffield.com

 

It's all good fun, and you can leave trains circulating on the main lines while you do the preparing and breaking up of trains, and turn the train engines.

 

If only the station pilot locos visit the carriage sidings, they don't need a turntable.

 

The only mystery remaining is why do traders photograph trains standing on a glass plate instead of a length of track? It makes them look daft.

 

Martin.

 

Wouldn't that clunk on the outside edges of the sleepers and ride up the platform ramps on ET Martin?

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, made a bit of progress. Delved into Templot and now have 8 roads at least 8' long. Just measured up and 8 coaches actually need 7', so there is room for the loco as well. If I used Peco loco lifts/cassettes for the incoming locos, the overall length could reduce by a foot, improving the access further to the rear loops. The yellow box is the stairs protruding into the room. At present there is around 18" to get past. 8 roads with 8 coaches will give me storage for 64 coaches, so hopefully plenty.

 

The four foot road will accommodate cassettes and these will be stored under ET station itself where I have more than 4' depth so they can go in end on. They will be filled with assorted freight stock and possibly overflow coaches.

 

If I decide to keep locos on cassettes as well then they can either go under the storage or under ET station. 

 

Still to look at ET shed option, but it may well be possible for this to sit over the storage and still have plenty of clearance between the two...

 

Food for thought anyway.

 

Quick question for Martin. All the boards show on my Templot plan but for some reason they don't show in Sketchboard (top right area). Have I missed something? Now resolved... Thanks.

 

212753843_revised_storage(1).jpg.86d9af07809ec106266ff66471192089.jpg

 

Edited by gordon s
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, gordon s said:

Quick question for Martin. All the boards show on my Templot plan but for some reason they don't show in Sketchboard (top right area). Have I missed something?

 

Hi Gordon,

 

The problem is metafile break-over. Some of the boards are partially outside the boundary defined by the track plan templates. Do this:

 

sb_boundary.png.818d1d679916a53a72b8ee098f95aa6c.png

 

Click this button, and then draw a rectangle on the screen which entirely surrounds the track plan AND all the baseboard outlines.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Paul Cram said:

Might it be better if they were the other way round i.e. accessed from the end near the stairs?

Then Gordon would have to rebuild all the crossovers at each end. Oh lord nooooo

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Paul Cram said:

Might it be better if they were the other way round i.e. accessed from the end near the stairs?


I can’t disagree, but feel it wouldn’t be possible as I have looked before. By all means mark up a plan showing where you suggest it would run.

 

Bear in mind though there are certain parameters that have to be met. You will need a run of 8.2m to descend 82mm, the minimum radius is 3’ and space is limited at the top of the layout. I certainly won’t want to rip up track unless there really is an advantage over what I have on Templot at the moment. The other issue is that space to cut through the running loops is somewhat restricted with Tortoise motors mounted under the turnouts above.

 

Happy to look at your proposal once you can add a drawing of what you’re suggesting.

Edited by gordon s
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gordon,

 

Looking at your photos, there is no platform at Y?

 

gordon_xy.png.89fd926c918a7cc6bf7cce66cc619138.png

 

In which case presumably X is the terminal platform?

 

Which means you seem to be missing a crossover to allow coaching sets from the carriage sidings/storage area to access that platform (red above).

 

If terminal operations are taking place on that side of the station, it would seem logical to have some loco turning and servicing facilities on that side too. There seems to be room to put a turntable and a couple of spurs in the bottom corner.

 

The purple line would offer a better access to the platform for long sets than the red crossover, but it requires a diamond-crossing, which I know you are not keen on:

 

gordon_xyz.png.522546ac91d287d60a0f888686c43c1d.png

 

If you build it as a switch-diamond, it would be entirely reliable (and easier to build, if you have a couple of tortoises to spare).

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Edited by martin_wynne
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My word you have been busy whilst I've been sleeping.....

 

Martin, I wondered how long it would take before you spotted that....:D

 

Yes, it was bugging me, but ran it through Templot this morning and was surprised on two fronts. Firstly, I didn't think it would fit and I'd already decided I wasn't going to rip up existing track and secondly, I knew it would shorten the approach and could screw up  the gradient.

 

Wrong on both counts.

 

DSCF1588.jpg.dd691c665906a3dad897683b14974e7d.jpg

 

The crossing will be a switched crossing, but I still have a few Tortoise motors kicking about from those I bought in 2005. Having totted up the lengths of all the track pieces I'll lose about 1.4m from the gradient, but it still comes out at 7.623m or 1:93, so acceptable. I'll leave the turntable suggestion for another day.

 

Thanks Paul for your suggestion and again surprisingly (for me) it may work. I'm not a great fan of slips, but feel I could cope with it, so I could change the turnout at A to a single slip.

 

reversed_storage.jpg.979985d0bacc673857c4f66bee071c9e.jpg

 

The reversed storage certainly improves access and the length of run is still 7.359m or 1:90, so below my 1:100, but acceptable. None of the storage has been built yet, so I'll bear this in mind. I haven't had time to look operationally if it works, but it possibly poses another challenge in as much I was thinking of the shed being on top of the storage, so that will need considerable thought to see if that can be reversed also. First thoughts were the gradient implications would mean it would have to come in at the top of the layout, but then that shuts off access to the back of the layout, so a non starter without a lift up section. Pointwork/buildings etc may not make that feasible.

 

Disclaimer......Thanks for all your suggestions, but nothing of any consequence will be done for several months. I have now been given a date for my surgery of April 5th which will lay me up for several months (or for good....:D), so any ideas you have have kindly put forward are for Templot and discussion only. I'm blessed with a few weeks where I can't do much other than think and doodle, so the timing is perfect. Any revisions will have to be simple to install and not involve ripping up anything already in place or this will never run again....;)

 

Never a dull moment.....

Edited by gordon s
  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's going wrong today, as things seem to fit......;)

 

Taken the shed road off the storage loop (shown in yellow) and it is possible to run the shed board as a peninsula over the storage board. The overall clearance is circa 200m, so I may need to think the support structure carefully so as not to restrict access for perish the thought, a derailment or probably a tie bar that has come adrift, although I've had none fail as yet. It may well be a bit of tweaking the incoming curve can ensure access to pointwork is fine.

 

I've laid the shed road out in yellow and it will ascend 82mm to clear the main lines. Total length is 6.432m, so a gradient of 1:78 which is perfectly acceptable for light locos.

 

An afternoon of sitting on the sofa watching football awaits. I did 11 minutes on the cross trainer earlier which damn near killed me, so I'll even watch Arsenal before Spurs come on.....

 

reversed_storage_plus_shed_road.jpg.be8bb8287b33f483fe87bb14df506ec6.jpg

  • Like 10
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of vertical traversers....

https://www.garagepride.co.uk/garage-shelves/motostor-shelving.html

Such a contraption will lift 75Kg apparently.  Whilst I'm not necessarily suggesting one of these (though it may well have potential) it does show that gadgets are out there, at not too frightening a price.  A similar idea, multiple shelves, descending into a cabinet for dust-free storage, multiple position stop in order to horizontally align a chosen shelf with the outbound tracks.....

  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Morning all....

 

I ran out of decoders yesterday after running in and fitting my last Zimo into this wee beauty. Always loved B17's and 61637 Thorpe Hall from Hornby runs really well or should I say now runs really well. Had a problem with the front bogie continually derailing on one crossover so out came the vernier and as suspected the back to back was down to 14.07mm. A few minutes adjustment to 14.4mm and it now runs sweet as a nut. I still have all the bits and bobs to fit, but here it is trundling around this morning.

 

DSCF1595.jpg.49add85da931acb2984defe649c1793a.jpg

 

Many thanks to all you input on the storage issue and I can see now that moving the storage around will be a benefit. Particular thanks to Paul for that suggestion. What's more there is the space to do it and some unexpected bonuses. Of course it means building a single slip, but a few clicks with my mouse and a C10 turnout was miraculously turned into a single slip on the same radius as before. I know I shouldn't be amazed that it fits after pottering with Templot all these years, but it will be a drop in replacement if I can build it. It will have a switched crossing so will need four Tortoise motors to run it, but I have no problem with that as my other switched crossing behaves impeccably.

 

The slip pans out to be just under 18" long, but the slip road stays the same as the old curve at 51" radius. In case I struggle building this, I have mapped out an alternative yesterday using separate C10 turnouts and that also works fine, but obviously reduces the run slightly and that in turn steepens the gradient. To be honest the single slip looks so much better, that I'll run with it.

 

DSCF1593.jpg.267e173844b532a01cf2f7b09ca57587.jpg

 

I mentioned some unexpected bonuses and have found that moving the storage around 180 degrees removes the need for the two outer lines over the stairwell plus the additional crossing from line 6 won't be required. I was never 100% happy how tight things were against the stair back wall, so gaining around 6" will allow a better scenic finish.

 

With no decoders for a few days, I pulled this out of storage for another look.....

 

DSCF1590.jpg.ada2f8c18fc5bcc94ac1e87ee75fcff4.jpg

 

Apart from a Comet chassis I built years ago, I have never built a loco, so looking at this pile of bits for a J50 from DJH is somewhat daunting. I've probably had this four or five years now, so last night I scanned through the DJH site and was staggered to see the kit plus wheels, motor and gearbox is now £230. Even more surprising is that you can buy the Hornby one for £69 and I suspect at the end of the day, it will look better, run better etc but I'll have the pleasure of knowing I built it. Whether that is worth the additional cost is debatable for me, particularly if I mess it up......:D

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=742

 

 

 

 

Edited by gordon s
  • Like 10
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gordon s changed the title to Eastwood Town - Into the unknown on two counts......

Gordon

 

The cost of kits now is very high, especially when you take the cost of wheels motors and gears into consideration. I see it has one of the DJH's gearboxes which I believe are excellent (I have 2 to use) if not a bit large in todays terms, it might be worth saving it for a larger tank loco is siting it becomes an issue.

 

I have built up a stock of DJH kits, the only issue is that the chassis are designed for 00 gauge, nicely cast bodies though. I think you will enjoy building it, are you going to use soldered construction?

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

Having read TW's notes I will solder the chassis with 145 degree solder. I feel comfortable soldering and have some low melting point solder and a temperature controlled iron so tempted to solder the body as well, rather than use epoxy. I'm always fearful of epoxy spilling out and suspect it could be a problem cleaning it off, but I'm all ears to those who have built kits before.

 

Of course I may well just put it back in the box for another day and tackle the slip instead......:D

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, gordon s said:

Having read TW's notes I will solder the chassis with 145 degree solder. I feel comfortable soldering and have some low melting point solder and a temperature controlled iron so tempted to solder the body as well, rather than use epoxy. I'm always fearful of epoxy spilling out and suspect it could be a problem cleaning it off, but I'm all ears to those who have built kits before.

 

Of course I may well just put it back in the box for another day and tackle the slip instead......:D

 

I have it on very good authority that TW can detect those miscreants who assemble loco kits with glue - he sneaks in undetected during the hours of darkness and reduces entire layouts built with soldered trackwork to a kit of parts, baseboards n' all.  Be warned....:laugh:

  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, gordon s said:

Having read TW's notes I will solder the chassis with 145 degree solder. I feel comfortable soldering and have some low melting point solder and a temperature controlled iron so tempted to solder the body as well, rather than use epoxy. I'm always fearful of epoxy spilling out and suspect it could be a problem cleaning it off, but I'm all ears to those who have built kits before.

 

Of course I may well just put it back in the box for another day and tackle the slip instead......:D

Normal solder works better.. bit of acid flux, hot iron..bobscyour uncle.

 

If you want to glue the loco together feel free.. after all it isn't a DJH A2 or A1 kit:jester:

 

My first ever kit (a wills flatiron was epoxied together by me48 years ago and is still in one piece. Use whatever methoss you want Gordon..just enjoy doing it!

 

Baz

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Barry O said:

Normal solder works better.

I second that: 145 is for overlays and non-structural joints. (And even then, with a proper technique, I don't use 145 nowadays.)

 

Don't ask me how I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gordon s changed the title to Eastwood Town - You wait ages for one, then two come along......

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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.