Wright writes.....

[t-b-g]

8 hours ago, PupCam said:

 

 Due to the lack of structural integrity in terms of the combination of the frame material and the geometry of the front sections of the frames I presume. 

 

The frames must have been very shallow at this point to clear the pony wheel but the important fact is that the buffer centres appear to be below or at least very close to the lower edge of the frame in these locos and thus the forces acting through the buffers are  not acting directly "through" the frames but applying a bending moment in such cases.  With repeated loading the frames and/or the beams themselves will bend if the design of the structure does not adequately take into account those bending loads. 

 

As the O4s seemed to be particularly prone to this one can only conclude that the mechanical design of this aspect in these locomotives  was, how shall we put this, sub-optimal.      Perhaps a somewhat contentious statement depending on one's allegiance but the evidence is clear to see!   On the other hand, If the design had been adequately strong the frames/beams would not have bent when service loads were applied.

 

Alan

 

That is well explained and makes a good case. I must defend the design though. The locos were known for being rugged, reliable and easy to keep running under difficult circumstances, which is why they lasted so long, on both sides of the world. They were chosen above the technically  more advanced GWR 28xx as the ROD design because that needed better quality engineered facilities to keep it going and you couldn't  send them back to Swindon for attention! The fact that an O4 could take a battering and just keep going in traffic was not a weakness but a strength. Other classes got bent too but had to go straight to works so were not photographed working.

[The Johnster]

I suspect that 04s were robust enough for normal service use, which in the case of a heavy coal hauler is pretty knockabout.  But the nature of the work of a heavy coal hauler does expose it to runaways down banks, errors of judgement in permissive block sections, and other similar situations where even a low-speed collision with anything in front of you releases very considerable forces at the impact point because of the momentum imparted by a thousand tons or so behind the tender.  Designing a loco to survive such impacts undamaged means it's weight is increased for no commercial advantage in haulage capacity and one has to consider the damage such a strengthened behemoth is capable of causing to the trains it hits.  

 

Significantly, there is little front end damage to the loco in the photo beyond the buffer beam and the buffers; one has been torn off (or already removed when the photo was taken) and the other bent downwards.  This suggests a sturdy front end, and if the accident unfolded as I suggested, with a downward force bending or ripping out the buffers and distorting the buffer beam, it is questionable that any loco would be able to survive without this sort of damage.  The loco, capable of movement under it's own steam, has to be removed from service immediately as it cannot be allowed to run without buffers or drawgear in the correct positions.  A repair can probably be affected at a main shed, and a works visit is not required, but the loco has to be closely examined to check that damage is confined to the buffer beam and buffers and that the frame is in alignment, motion runs smoothly, and that the boiler mountings and steam pipes have not been disturbed by the bump.  Would a hydraulic test be needed for the boiler?  Don't know, but I imagine the boiler inspector would have wanted to check things over.

[31A]

All this talk of point rodding is very coincidental as yesterday (before I read this) I was wondering what to do next and thought I really ought to do some rodding!

 

I'd tried before using the Brassmasters etches for the rollers, but really couldn't get on with them.  I'm not sure whether there was too much cusp on the etchings or something but they seemed to need a lot of cleaning up and even then were very fiddly - it had taken me all evening to put one together!  The whitemetal rollers sold by Wizard to my eye set the rods too far apart and the Wills product looks over scale - it might be OK for a couple of rods next to each other but when there are more the discrepancy would add up.

 

So I decided to have a go at making my own rollers; here is the result, to produce a short run of four rods to sit in the 'six foot' between Platforms 3 and 4.  The rollers themselves are lengths of 0.9mm brass wire, to which the rods are soldered, the rods being the 0.45mm square N/S that Wizard sells, then a piece of 0,45mm wire soldered across the top to represent the retaining piece.  Each roller is then soldered onto a chunk of copper clad sleeper to represent the top of the still which is sunk into the ground.  The cranks are from the Brassmasters etch.  The rods leading off at the right hand end are where the rods will go under the Platform 3 line, and the cranks at the left hand end lead to the points and point locks at the end of Plaltforms 3 and 4.  I'm afraid the paintwork is Peco, so I don't really intend to do anything more to represent locking bars etc.

 

I wanted to give the impression that you get with channel section rodding in particular, of the rods being very close together and forming almost a solid 'deck' that you could walk across (although the S&T don't like it if you do!) with minimal gaps between the rods, and I used a piece of thin aluminium sheet (from a drinks can) as a spacer to keep the rods apart, but as you can see, the biggest problem was that the solder flowed down from the rollers between the rods and soldered them together!  This short length took me 4 hours yesterday afternoon, although hopefully it could get quicker with practice. This morning I shall weather it and see whether it's useable; it will be towards the back of the layout so I'm hopeful it will be.  The pins that form the crank pivots are left 'long' and should push down into the cork underlay, with the stools being glued down with Evo Stik.

 

 

 

 

[Denbridge]

9 hours ago, PupCam said:

 

 Due to the lack of structural integrity in terms of the combination of the frame material and the geometry of the front sections of the frames I presume. 

 

The frames must have been very shallow at this point to clear the pony wheel but the important fact is that the buffer centres appear to be below or at least very close to the lower edge of the frame in these locos and thus the forces acting through the buffers are  not acting directly "through" the frames but applying a bending moment in such cases.  With repeated loading the frames and/or the beams themselves will bend if the design of the structure does not adequately take into account those bending loads. 

 

As the O4s seemed to be particularly prone to this one can only conclude that the mechanical design of this aspect in these locomotives  was, how shall we put this, sub-optimal.      Perhaps a somewhat contentious statement depending on one's allegiance but the evidence is clear to see!   On the other hand, If the design had been adequately strong the frames/beams would not have bent when service loads were applied.

 

Alan

Looking at photos, the buffer beams appear unaffected. Which suggests it was the running plates and valances which had an inherent weakness. I would suggest that mainframes distorted to that degree would have meant immediate withdrawal for overhaul.

[grahame]

Here's some show and tell of my current N/2mm modelling project. It's of a block/row that I posted up details of several pages back now. Anyway here's progress so far. There's five separate sub-assemblies not fixed together in this pic with plenty yet to do. But, hopefully, it's starting to look a little reminiscent of the real block (apart from the elastic band holding things temporarily together):

 

 

[Compound2632]

10 hours ago, PupCam said:

 

 Due to the lack of structural integrity in terms of the combination of the frame material and the geometry of the front sections of the frames I presume. 

 

The frames must have been very shallow at this point to clear the pony wheel but the important fact is that the buffer centres appear to be below or at least very close to the lower edge of the frame in these locos and thus the forces acting through the buffers are  not acting directly "through" the frames but applying a bending moment in such cases.  With repeated loading the frames and/or the beams themselves will bend if the design of the structure does not adequately take into account those bending loads. 

 

As the O4s seemed to be particularly prone to this one can only conclude that the mechanical design of this aspect in these locomotives  was, how shall we put this, sub-optimal.      Perhaps a somewhat contentious statement depending on one's allegiance but the evidence is clear to see!   On the other hand, If the design had been adequately strong the frames/beams would not have bent when service loads were applied.

 

Alan

 

This is an ingenious argument but, as @Denbridge points out, more applicable to the valences than the frames as, I think, is borne out by close observation. Having put a ruler up against the selection of photos posted, I don't think we're looking at front frame droop, but rather a hump in the valence and footplate extending in the worst case - 63608 - from just in front of the splashers, over the cylinders, then back down to the buffer beam, which is at its correct height in relation to the frames. The buffer is between the points at which the buffer beam is supported by the frame and the valence - slightly closer to the frame - so the force is distributed between the frame and the valence (demonstrating that the latter isn't just there for decoration and there's function in the way it curves down to match the full height of the buffer beam). There is also an angle bracket towards the top of the buffer beam that does transfer some of the force to the frames but, significantly, it's above the plane of the buffer. Whilst the frames can withstand a rough shunt, there is a significant force on the valence giving an upwards bending moment. On the Robinson 2-8-0, there is a structural weakness in the valence - it is bent outwards to clear the cylinder. In the case of 63655, I think we can see that the valence has fractured just at the kink at the front of the cylinder, with the footplating lifted up by at least its own thickness.

 

The rather more dramatic damage in @micknich2003's photo supports this analysis:

 

 

The bufferbeam is undamaged between the frames; it is the valence that has given way. On the RHS (from the photographer's point of view) the valence has fractured ahead of the cylinder - the outwards kink to clear the cylinder is evident. On the LHS, the bufferbeam has sheered and been bent backwards from below - the angle bracket at the top has more-or-less held.

 

This GA drawing of a ROD 2-8-0 from the NRM should make all these features clear.

Edited April 6, 2020 by Compound2632
Acknowledge @Denbridge, correct spelling of ingenious, NRM link corrected.

[Gravy Train]

Hi Tony,

I hope you are keeping well.

What fantastic photos they are of Carlisle on page 1750, just shows the shear size of this layout and the amount of work that has gone into it, absolutely fantastic.

Peter

[great central]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

That is well explained and makes a good case. I must defend the design though. The locos were known for being rugged, reliable and easy to keep running under difficult circumstances, which is why they lasted so long, on both sides of the world. They were chosen above the technically  more advanced GWR 28xx as the ROD design because that needed better quality engineered facilities to keep it going and you couldn't  send them back to Swindon for attention! The fact that an O4 could take a battering and just keep going in traffic was not a weakness but a strength. Other classes got bent too but had to go straight to works so were not photographed working.

 

From memory and lots of photos, most of the Colwick allocation of 2-8-0s worked chimney first when heading uphill through New Basford towards the pits north of Nottingham. 

As there were unlikely to be turning facilities they would return downhill with loaded, unfitted coal trains.

This would leave the front buffer beam holding back several hundred tons of loaded wagons, which could also be subject to rough stopping and starting.

I well remember seeing locos stopped in Victoria setting back slightly onto the train to compress the buffers, no doubt helped by a knowledgeable guard holding his brakes on, before getting a spring assisted take off with lots of banging as the slack was taken up in the couplings. The guard then hanging on tight as his van shot forward!

Dare I suggest something else missing from the various models? It seemed to be the practice at Colwick to top the coal up in the tender at every opportunity, even when only doing a relatively short trip, such that the heap was usually well above the height of the cab roof.

 

[Michael Edge]

27 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

Hi Tony,

I hope you are keeping well.

What fantastic photos they are of Carlisle on page 1750, just shows the shear size of this layout and the amount of work that has gone into it, absolutely fantastic.

Peter

Another one showing one of your signal boxes Peter. 

The scenery wasn't originally intended to go this far down the M&C, it has all got a bit fictitious by this point but there's no real point in having so much railway off-scene.

 

[t-b-g]

10 minutes ago, great central said:

 

From memory and lots of photos, most of the Colwick allocation of 2-8-0s worked chimney first when heading uphill through New Basford towards the pits north of Nottingham. 

As there were unlikely to be turning facilities they would return downhill with loaded, unfitted coal trains.

This would leave the front buffer beam holding back several hundred tons of loaded wagons, which could also be subject to rough stopping and starting.

I well remember seeing locos stopped in Victoria setting back slightly onto the train to compress the buffers, no doubt helped by a knowledgeable guard holding his brakes on, before getting a spring assisted take off with lots of banging as the slack was taken up in the couplings. The guard then hanging on tight as his van shot forward!

Dare I suggest something else missing from the various models? It seemed to be the practice at Colwick to top the coal up in the tender at every opportunity, even when only doing a relatively short trip, such that the heap was usually well above the height of the cab roof.

 

 

When you read stories of how the railways were run, you come across those sorts of experiences from guards. They tended to know the drivers and if it was certain ones, they would be braced in the van, wedged in as best they could and with nothing loose near. Other drivers would take up the slack in the couplings one by one and not accelerate away properly until the van was moving.

 

I envy you your experiences watching such things. My dad used to say that Victoria was a wonderful place to watch the railway working. So much going on and such variety. Sadly, I only know the place as a shopping centre with a tunnel mouth and a clock tower!

 

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, 31A said:

All this talk of point rodding is very coincidental as yesterday (before I read this) I was wondering what to do next and thought I really ought to do some rodding!

 

I'd tried before using the Brassmasters etches for the rollers, but really couldn't get on with them.  I'm not sure whether there was too much cusp on the etchings or something but they seemed to need a lot of cleaning up and even then were very fiddly - it had taken me all evening to put one together!  The whitemetal rollers sold by Wizard to my eye set the rods too far apart and the Wills product looks over scale - it might be OK for a couple of rods next to each other but when there are more the discrepancy would add up.

 

So I decided to have a go at making my own rollers; here is the result, to produce a short run of four rods to sit in the 'six foot' between Platforms 3 and 4.  The rollers themselves are lengths of 0.9mm brass wire, to which the rods are soldered, the rods being the 0.45mm square N/S that Wizard sells, then a piece of 0,45mm wire soldered across the top to represent the retaining piece.  Each roller is then soldered onto a chunk of copper clad sleeper to represent the top of the still which is sunk into the ground.  The cranks are from the Brassmasters etch.  The rods leading off at the right hand end are where the rods will go under the Platform 3 line, and the cranks at the left hand end lead to the points and point locks at the end of Plaltforms 3 and 4.  I'm afraid the paintwork is Peco, so I don't really intend to do anything more to represent locking bars etc.

 

I wanted to give the impression that you get with channel section rodding in particular, of the rods being very close together and forming almost a solid 'deck' that you could walk across (although the S&T don't like it if you do!) with minimal gaps between the rods, and I used a piece of thin aluminium sheet (from a drinks can) as a spacer to keep the rods apart, but as you can see, the biggest problem was that the solder flowed down from the rollers between the rods and soldered them together!  This short length took me 4 hours yesterday afternoon, although hopefully it could get quicker with practice. This morning I shall weather it and see whether it's useable; it will be towards the back of the layout so I'm hopeful it will be.  The pins that form the crank pivots are left 'long' and should push down into the cork underlay, with the stools being glued down with Evo Stik.

 

 

 

 

That's very neat and effective work, Steve.

 

How much have you got to make - over 30'? 

 

 'The whitemetal rollers sold by Wizard to my eye set the rods too far apart'

 

With respect (why do we say this?) I beg to differ...... 

 

 

Wood Green, looking south. The rods are quite some distance apart.

 

 

And Retford, looking north. To my eyes the MSE cast stools set the rods exactly the right distance apart. That is, just about enough space to squeeze another one in. 

 

You're right about the Wills stuff, though. It's nearer 7mm Scale than 4mm.

 

I've ordered the materials from Andrew this morning, in order to finish off the last four feet.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

You are right about the point rodding. It is one of those jobs that I have always put off. There is a great deal of sense in preparing for it at an early stage, creating gaps under tracks and adding bases for the stools. The only layout I was involved with that did get rodding was Thompson's End. Malcolm set the rodding out on a large drawing, worked out all the push and pull movements to make the equal and fitted it all with the cranks and compensators.  That was much smaller than LB but still took ages.

 

George Norton made the signal wire posts. Not really known for his prowess at scenic work, he made each pulley from three tiny discs, put a retaining strap over each one and put the right number of pulleys on each post. Sadly, he made the posts from strips of ply sleeper material and every time we cleaned the track, one or more got broken off.

 

When it was all completed, it was a lot of work but worth it for the difference.

 

My present project is at that early stage and due to my association with Laurie Adams and having seen what you have done on LB, I feel almost obliged  to have it all done properly on this one!

 

 

Thanks Tony,

 

I didn't go to the trouble taken by Malcolm (I don't have the expertise) in making a large drawing beforehand. 

 

My cranks and compensators probably (definitely!) wouldn't work in reality (not that they have to), but it's the overall effect I was after. Which, I think, has worked.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[The Johnster]

Driving an unfitted or part fitted train without damaging the guard unduly was a Dark Art, and not all drivers were as good at it as they thought they were.   Once the train is gently 'picked up' and the guard is aboard his van and has given the driver the 'tip' for right away, the trick of the job is to keep all the couplings taut all the time.  In the days before instanters there was a very real possibility of breaking one when the train 'snatched' as power was applied too quickly or excessively.  So, accelerating from rest to running speed is easy enough so long as it is done progressively and smoothly, and decelerating to a stand from running speed is easy enough so long as you have time and distance to buffer the train up before serious brake application; the guard will assist you with the van brake which will keep the last dozen or so couplings taut.

 

Fine, anyone can do that with a bit of common sense and gentle handling of regulators, reversers, and brakes.  But railways are very rarely level, and some are distinctly hilly.  Even on level track at a constant running speed it is harder than you think to keep the couplings taut, because the drawhooks are sprung. So, any movement in them, which is inevitable, will multiply itself into slack couplings along the train which then go into a snatch, because the loco will have picked up a bit more speed and the driver will have shut the regulator to keep a lid on this if he feels the train pushing him.  When the loco begins to lose speed, steam is put on again resulting in a snatch which might be barely noticeable at the tender drawhook, but 60 wagons back on the van, where the guard has no warning of it...

 

On an undulating route this is much harder to control.  In a perfect world you run at a constant speed up hill and down dale, but the gradients mean that the train is going to buffer up as soon as you shut off steam to control the train on downhill stretches.  The guard applies his van brake to assist, but the tops of the banks act as convex vertical curves which stretch the drawhooks on their springs, which makes the buffering up more violent as they recoil.  At the bottom, the train is buffered up tight, and the driver must put steam on to keep the momentum he needs to get up the bank the other side; another snatch is inevitable and it takes a very skilled driver to avoid it being a violent one; the guard is aware of this and braces himself.  He must sit down as soon as he releases the brake, and his seat has shoulder pads for this reason.

 

Few drivers in my experience were dangerously bad, but there were some.  They tended not to last, though, being pressured to take early retirement by managers and their union reps.  I preferred the out and out speed merchants, bad though they were, to a 'rough' driver.

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Gravy Train said:

Hi Tony,

I hope you are keeping well.

What fantastic photos they are of Carlisle on page 1750, just shows the shear size of this layout and the amount of work that has gone into it, absolutely fantastic.

Peter

Good afternoon Peter,

 

Very well, thank you; as I hope you are.

 

I believe all the architectural/engineering modelling in the following pictures of Carlisle is your work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brilliant work!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I didn't go to the trouble taken by Malcolm (I don't have the expertise) in making a large drawing beforehand. 

 

My cranks and compensators probably (definitely!) wouldn't work in reality (not that they have to), but it's the overall effect I was after. Which, I think, has worked.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Malcolm had a 7ft scenic section to work out, with a handful of points and if it was wrong, nobody could know because it wasn't  a real place. So his volume of work was considerably less than what you have done. It is one of those jobs a bit like brake rigging on a carriage. If there is something  there and it looks as if it could be right, that is probably enough.

 

The Wizard rodding stools look OK to me. You have to open the slots to take scale thickness rods and that makes the thick metal spacers thinner anyway. Looking at the prototype photos, if you are referring to the "rodding" near the camera at Wood Green, I think that is really two dead rails laid on their side rather than widely spaced point rodding. There is some rodding in the distance but not where you can judge the spacing.

[jamie92208]

I did point rodding on Long Preston and spent quite a bit if timevplanning out where items suchvas compensators should be,. In 7mm I used stools from Ambis and I think C& L for the cranks etc.  Rodding was round brass wire for my time period.  It certainly improved the appearance of the layout and was worth the effort.  I've been able to salvage most of it for Green Ayre and have got some fitted.  

 

There was however a run of 4 rods along the base of the down platform, approx 7' in total. All invisible to the public.  I was going to omit it but one of my team, John Pateick, I think, said"  You better put it on Jamie because when you get that Tony Wright to photograph the layout he's bound to put his camera on the inside of the tracks and the lack of rodding will show up."  Sure enough when the aforesaid Mr Wright showed up, one of yhe best photos he took was taken from the Goods Yard looking towards the down platform.  He's got a lot to answer for.

 

Jamie

[Ray Flintoft]

The latest additions to my loco. stud . Both are detailed Bachman RTR  .I'm happy to use rtr but not out of the box .

 No. 42116 retained the early BR emblem to withdrawal in 6/67 . The other A.1 , no . 60154 is a roller bearing rendition from the DJH kit .

                             Cheers ,

                                   Ray .

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, Gravy Train said:

 

Once more, I can't open a new post without an old one coming up.

 

No matter; more on the point rodding................

 

Firstly, thanks for all the comments. Most useful.

 

The following pictures show (I hope) the point rodding in context. That is part of an overall scene.

 

 

 

 

Really close-inspection will reveal a few kinks and wobbles (my work is always a bit 'kinky'), but I think it sets the scene. It's no more than 'dressing' for the real things of interest (at least to me); the locos and trains. 

 

 

[31A]

Well here is the run of point rodding that I made yesterday, installed on the layout.  It is just a start.  I will need to make a representation of the rods passing under the rails to the right, and disappearing under the wooden platform extension.  There will need to be a few more bits to represent the drive to the points on the left, and its FPL.  Also I may put some fine ballast in the six foot to make the stools look more as if they are planted.  This picture is a cropped enlargement; in reality I don't find the areas where solder ran between the rods too obtrusive.

 

 

I wanted to give the impression that you get with 'square' (channel section) rodding that the rods are very close together; it almost looks as though you wouldn't be able to get you hand down in between them, and the top surface looks almost like garden decking.  The picture from Retford (further up) shows the kind of thing I had in mind.  I think with round rodding that may not be so apparent, e.g. the picture on page 9 at Yeovil Town in the 2mm Scale Association book.

 

The 2mm Scale Association publication  says that the pitch of the rods is 2 3/4" for U-channel rods.  My run of four rods works out at about 4mm overall width, so that seems about right.  I have some of the Wizard castings, although they are very old, from MSE days when I bought them and decided not to use them, so possibly they have been altered since.  If I used them to make a run of four rods it would work out at about 5mm wide (over the width of the rollers).  Another reason I was put off using them was that I seem to have often seen them on layouts at exhibitions where the rodding has come adrift from the rollers which looks horrible; obviously I don't know how they were stuck together in the first place, but I wanted something more robust.

 

Thankfully, I don't have 30' to do!  When the rodding in the picture comes out of the other side of the island platform, it will run between the platform 2 line and the middle siding, and will have a wooden cover over it as it is an area where staff work, based on a similar arrangement at Norwich Thorpe in the 1950s. Then at some point it will have to pass under that line and Platform 1 to get to the signal box.  I think there will be quite an impressive run in front of the box, but as I haven't built the box yet I can't really do that for a while!

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Please PM me with an indication of the going rate for the SER van including postage.

Could you PM me please, Stephen?

 

I can then respond because I don't know how to send a new PM.

 

With the old RMweb there was a button below the avatar (which I could understand). Not now.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[landscapes]

20 minutes ago, Ray Flintoft said:

The latest additions to my loco. stud . Both are detailed Bachman RTR  .I'm happy to use rtr but not out of the box .

 No. 42116 retained the early BR emblem to withdrawal in 6/67 . The other A.1 , no . 60154 is a roller bearing rendition from the DJH kit .

                             Cheers ,

                                   Ray .

Hi Ray

 

Very nice shed scene photo, I particularly like the inspection pit detail.

 

Regards

 

David

[Tony Wright]

6 minutes ago, 31A said:

Well here is the run of point rodding that I made yesterday, installed on the layout.  It is just a start.  I will need to make a representation of the rods passing under the rails to the right, and disappearing under the wooden platform extension.  There will need to be a few more bits to represent the drive to the points on the left, and its FPL.  Also I may put some fine ballast in the six foot to make the stools look more as if they are planted.  This picture is a cropped enlargement; in reality I don't find the areas where solder ran between the rods too obtrusive.

 

 

I wanted to give the impression that you get with 'square' (channel section) rodding that the rods are very close together; it almost looks as though you wouldn't be able to get you hand down in between them, and the top surface looks almost like garden decking.  The picture from Retford (further up) shows the kind of thing I had in mind.  I think with round rodding that may not be so apparent, e.g. the picture on page 9 at Yeovil Town in the 2mm Scale Association book.

 

The 2mm Scale Association publication  says that the pitch of the rods is 2 3/4" for U-channel rods.  My run of four rods works out at about 4mm overall width, so that seems about right.  I have some of the Wizard castings, although they are very old, from MSE days when I bought them and decided not to use them, so possibly they have been altered since.  If I used them to make a run of four rods it would work out at about 5mm wide (over the width of the rollers).  Another reason I was put off using them was that I seem to have often seen them on layouts at exhibitions where the rodding has come adrift from the rollers which looks horrible; obviously I don't know how they were stuck together in the first place, but I wanted something more robust.

 

Thankfully, I don't have 30' to do!  When the rodding in the picture comes out of the other side of the island platform, it will run between the platform 2 line and the middle siding, and will have a wooden cover over it as it is an area where staff work, based on a similar arrangement at Norwich Thorpe in the 1950s. Then at some point it will have to pass under that line and Platform 1 to get to the signal box.  I think there will be quite an impressive run in front of the box, but as I haven't built the box yet I can't really do that for a while!

 

 

 

 

It's very effective, Steve,

 

Most-convincing. 

 

The problem is (if 'problem' is the right word) it's much more realistic than the points it's 'designed' to operate. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[micknich2003]

Here's a nice bit of inspiration for your point roding. York Locomotive signalbox, June 1909.

[31A]

31 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

It's very effective, Steve,

 

Most-convincing. 

 

The problem is (if 'problem' is the right word) it's much more realistic than the points it's 'designed' to operate. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thank you, Tony!  I quite agree.  I started building this layout over 20 years ago (I don't rush into things!) and if I was to start now I wouldn't start from here!

 

[Headstock]

Just when I thought it was safe to do a bit of modelling, I broke a tooth and I've been in excruciating pain for the last couple of days. I shall have to stop bending brass with my teeth. The Gods of Railway modelling are trying to make a point I think. Thank goodness I live in the UK. Despite the current situation our heroic dentists and pharmacists are still working through the current situation and came to my aid. Now that I'm patched up, what a difference  a day and antibiotics makes. There are so many heroes in this crisis, from Doctors to bin men/women, I confess to feel terrible about leaving the house at this time. I don't know what I was expecting, but I was surprised by how many people were out and about and I didn't encounter a single Police road block.

 

Despite my stumbling from one mini crisis to another at the moment, I did mange to fit the centre wheels to my BZ. I also fitted the door furniture and end details. The roof is just sitting in place at the moment, however, its interior bracing has been fitted to give it shape. The roof details, such as lights, vents and cornice are still to add.

 

The main modifications are with regard to electric lighting, the cutting away of the steps for battery boxes and the dynamo, unusually, this is mounted on the other side with the dynamo mounted inwards. Other alterations include the LNER type grab handles fitted to the guard's door. I'm determined to stay in now and model for Britain.