Wylde, an alternate Thame

[unravelled]

This is an introduction to an OO layout (Wylde), I’ve been working towards for some time. It’s had a couple of false starts, but now it’s about to be relocated from roof space to cellar, and be built in a slightly evolved form.[/size]

 

I have a good idea of what I think I want, but there are a number of decisions still to make  and changes to consider, so I’m putting the ideas up here to be considered, and have any obvious holes pointed out.[/size]

 

To start with what I’m most sure of. I want to recreate some of the scenes familiar from my teenage(ish) trainspotting/photographing days. Space does not permit the six track formation at Oxford North Junction where I spent so many hours, so I’m locating my layout  not too far away to an imaginary station on the Oxford to Princes Risborough line. This line has the great advantage that it saw trains diverted from the Birmingham direct line when problems or maintenance  closed the route north of Princes Risborough, so the bigger locos are entirely possible.[/size]

 

Timescale will be broadly within the maroon coaching stock era. I only remember red/cream stock from the family Hornby Dublo train set, and have no recollection of them in real life, though photos suggest I did see them. Chocolate and cream may well make an appearance. Locos will be mainly late crest, though bargain purchases  mean I’ll have a selection of early crest ones too. I have a slight temptation to add the odd pristine blue or blue grey vehicle, but this dates things too precisely, so I think I’ll stick with the maroon era.[/size]

 

In a previous iteration of this plan I included a branch and bay platform, (don’t ask me where it was supposed to go in reality). Now it’s gone I don’t have the problem of inventing a realistic  station layout, as I think the track plan of Wheatley will do very nicely. Thame itself is a bit more complex and sprawling, though I do like its situation in a shallow cutting, so some merging of features will probably occur. [/size]

 

[/size]

[/size]

 

The other feature I want to include is a sprawling low relief factory complex as a backdrop, inspired by the canal elevation of Lucy’s works in Walton Well Road. As this scales to almost 3m in OO, it should be fun to create. One of the currently fanciful ideas I have is to make it rail connected, with part of it home to a fledgling industrial preservation group, (echoes of Dowty’s at Ashchurch).[/size]

 

 

I hope this is enough to get started. Next time I’ll start exploring some of the choices I have to make about how to proceed, with the idea of getting some helpfully contradictory feedback.[/size]

 

Thanks[/size]

 

Dave[/size]

Edited August 30, 2022 by unravelled

[David C]

Interesting plan for a layout. I like the idea of using low relief industrial buildings in the background. I've done the same on my layout, although mine are considerably smaller than what you are thinking of.

 

All the best

 

David C

[unravelled]

As this project has developed, some of the decisions made open up new possibilities. When started, I didn’t have a clear idea of when it should be set. I had been collecting a variety of stock, from various eras, with no real plan. Joining RMweb showed me the error of my ways, and I have decided that the focus should be the BR maroon era. As a consequence, I will not be running some of my older models, which brings me to some of the opportunities this opens up.

The first is track standards. I can’t see any reason not to use code 75 this time round, at least on the scenic section. But Peco or bullhead? Have I got the time to build my own? I’ve bought some Peco code 75 for testing which of my older stock is happy with it.

The second is about control, DC or DCC? Until recently, I felt that DCC had nothing to offer me, especially with a collection of older models which I wouldn’t have wanted to chip. Now these are out of the running, I wonder whether I should reconsider. Another recent development which has prompted my interest is the Hornby elink system. As a long time computer tinkerer, this seems like a good starting point.

 

Next time I’ll include some track plans and possible adaptations to this project.

 

Comments and questions welcomed

 

Thanks

 

Dave

[David C]

I'd definitely go with code 75 bullhead. I use SMP for plain track along with rail soldered to copper clad points (search for Woodstowe in this forum to see the results). The problem is the lack of chairs on the points - you could use the C & L system which uses plastic sleepers and plastic chairs and the result is visually a lot better. However, it is more expensive and, so I am told, a lot more fiddly to make (I've never built a point that way myself). 

 

I've built my own points for very many years now and I reckon it takes me about 2 hours to knock up a basic point using copper clad sleepers, including filing the frogs and switch blades - say 2 1/2 - 3 hours in total once the tiebars are fitted and the gaps in the copperclad cut and filled. If you do go down this route, expect to chuck away your first point or two before you get it right.

 

As regards DCC, I've no experience of it, although I am told the slow running of locos is significantly improved. I have no intention of using it as there will only ever be one loco moving at a time on my BLT. It is simply not worth the financial outlay.

 

If I was modelling a main line station with lots of trains moving at the same time, I would consider it - but there again, one person can really only control one train at a time! 

 

Whether you choose to go DCC depends on the sort of prototype you are modelling - and on how much spare dosh you've got!

 

David C

[unravelled]

I've almost convinced myself to build my own pointwork. I guess I should start with something in copperclad, but there is something about the gapped pcb which draws my eye and stands out. Might be good for the industrial part with inset track. One Idea I have thought about trying is to gap offcentre, near enough to the rail that one edge defines the solder fillet. If the whole of the  central copper between the solder fillets  could be removed so much the better. I do like the idea of threaded chaired track, and  wonder if I could combine bought in rail and chairs with my own laser cut  point bases, in ply or plastic. Your thoughts about of DCC for (operationally) simpler layouts could save me some money to spenf on point kits.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

[unravelled]

After a rather long delay, here are some trackplans.Sorry about the lack of a consistent scale.

First a SCARM track plan, approximately to scale, using Peco components. This may be a composite of several different layouts over the years. One thing which appears to have changed are the two turnouts  toe to toe at the left end of the goods shed, which were replaced by a double slip. Of course the plans I’ve found might be inaccurate. My preference would be two points for simplicity, but the slip  would shorten the formation.  The connection to the siding at the left of the layout was definitely removed well before my model’s time.

 

 

Here the plan is overlaid on  the approximate baseboard  I have to play with.

 

 

Although  I am not intending to model Thame, my layout will be largely based on it. In compressing the layout to fit the space available, I wanted to keep the platforms a scale length, so need to  shorten the right hand end of the plan This drawing  shows what I have come up with so far.

 

 

I have used a minimum radius of about 750mm for the hidden areas, but might see if dropping it to 600mm improves the approach to the visible area.

I had expected to omit the siding at the bottom, but it does seem to fit quite well into the space, though it wouldn’t bother me to lose it later to avoid too much clutter. There are road overbridges at both ends, in front of a curved backscene, roughly indicated by the unfilled outline. I am not sure  whether these would be better as a large radius smooth curve from flat backscene to the front edge, or a tighter curved section, say 250mm radius, then  another straight  section to the edge.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

 

[jimmy60001]

Hey Dave, I've been building an 00 guage model of Thame station for 8 years (It only took 2 weekends to do the track it was played with on and off for a few months then slid down the back of the bed) School work go in the way and I didn't have it out for quite a few years. Then at the start of the summer with my last few exams done I've fished it out and started doing some work to finish the scenery. Just wondered how you'd been getting on with yours in the last 18months 
regards
Jimmy

[unravelled]

Lots of things getting in the way of progress, but work is continuing. I've almost got the storage sidings finished, and writing that up is on my lengthening to do list. I'm glad to say that I haven't felt the neeed to change the theme or timeframe of the layout, and as a result I'm trying to dispose of some "wrong" stock.

It's good to know someone else has chosen the same prototype. What was your reason for modelling Thame?

 

I hope you make some good modelling progress this summer#

 

Thanks

 

Dave

[jimmy60001]

Thame is an easy choice i can effectively see it from my house. =D That means getting scale sizes is easy as i can just walk down there with a tape measure. A.so my parents can remember the last few years when it served an oil terminal. I've made a fair bit of progress ive made the banking, half ballasted and the station building done all bar painting.

[unravelled]

It's a long time since I've posted on this thread, and I hope to add a few updates in the coming weeks. One of the critical parts of this layout build is the lifting flap  across the door.  I hope the pictures will be fairly self explanatory, but please ask if anything is not clear.

 

This design isn't the cunning plan I had originally considered, but adapted from a design seen on Rmweb. I'm atraid I can't remember which thread the idea came from. but if someone recognises it please let me know , and I'll credit it. The main  mechanism uses kitchen cupboard hinges, which have the advantage of allowing a tightly aligned joint at the hinge end. The downside of this is that the free edge of the door kicks away from the hinge as it opens, so some degree of bevel is needed to let the flap open. 

 

The free end of the flap is located  by a couple of cabinet connector blocks. which I had handy. These have a nice tapered plug/socket for alighment. The fit of the flap is quite tight in these blocks such that  it needs a fair bit of force to seat or free it, which I consider an advantage. The silver block is a belt and braces  extra locating stop.

 

When first fitted, one corner of the flap sat a bit lower than intended. My solution was a wood screw slightly proud of the seat which was adjusted to even up the height. Because the blocks provide accurate location, a couple of mm gap could be left between the wood surfaces.

 

Once I felt the flap could be closed and  opened reliably, (and a  catch made), track laying was begun.

 

The first stage of this was to epoxy strips of copperclad on the intended track alignment at the opening end and let them harden. The boards were kept in alignment by soldered rails, but I'm not sure this was necessary.

 

Time will tell whether I should have screwed them down too... A gap of about a mm was left between the strips. After it had set, the track was prepared by cutting out a run of sleepers. The underside of the exposed rail was cleaned, as was the copperclad, and the track either side screwed down This is my preferred method of track fixing while adjustments are being made, and  will probably be the permanent solution for non scenic areas. When I was happy with the alignment, the rail was soldered to the copperclad. I know the soldering is terrible, I should have used a bigger iron...

 

The track was then cut using a razor saw, on a slight angle to improve  the clearance when opening. Finally, the copper was gapped between the rails. 

 

For testing, temporary contacts were added to feed the flap.

 

The hinge end was treated similarly, but power feeds and electrical links to the flap were included. A bigger iron made for better joints.

 

The final part of the system is a stop block to protect the trains from my driving.

 

 

Happy Christmas!

 

Dave

 

 

 

[unravelled]

It's about time I made a general progress report here, if only to convince myself that I have made progress.

Since the (slightly) false start documented in the early posts, I have made some adjustments and improvements to the scheme. One abandoned idea was the traverser for storage. After several goes I couldn'y make the idea work to my liking, so I have abandoned it in favour of a couple of fans of storage sidings. The overall plan for an alternate version of Thame, with rail served industry behind, hasn't changed, yet,

Now the lifting section is built, I can make some progress. My current thought is to build the industrial section first, with the station to follow. This way I can use up code 100 as inset track, while waiting for a suitable range of bullhead track to appear for the station. In its final form, the industry wil be accessed by a siding from the goods yard area, but I am considering building in a continuous run through the industry. This will have disguised connections at each end, to allow through running while the station area is built. As a very first step plain line will be installed through the station site to give roundy running while the factory is developed. One of the other considerations which has taken time away from this project was the need to do something about the Gauge 1 layoit (Tinories, link in sig) below the 00 one, while access was still easy.

I am still wrestling with the point electrification. My servo units are sorted, and a new controller board is working well enough. An unsuccessful change to Megapoints controllers was attempted. I have no issues with the electronics, but can't get on with muti push programming. I have ordered parts for a mark 2 control panel, more of that later. In the meantime, I can work the points manually to test out the track and electrics.

One change I have made to the overall idea is to extend the time period a little. I had intended to set the layout firmly in the br maroon era, mainly because I have no recollection of crimson and cream. There was crimson and cream stock on the childhood Hornby Dublo, but I never took to it. The first problem was that i want a Dapol GWR railcar when it arrives. As these didn't make it into a later livery, crimson cream will be the only option. Having made that decision, I was free to buy a rake of Hornby Collets, (yes I know they were unlikely to run as a rake...).Thanks to the outlet closures i got these at a good discount, especially considering the likely price of the newly announced maroon version.The upper end of the timescale is still fixed, (at the moment) to avoid the need of blue/grey stock.

Some photos soon after I've had a clean up.

Thanks

Dave

[unravelled]

OK, I never did get round to doing a clearup. Time for some pictures soon, but first a trackplan, (not to scale) of the storage side as it is now.

 

 

 

The grey tracks are  storage.

The blue tracks are the main running line.

The green tracks are an up (clockwise) loop.

The yellow tracks are a down (anticlockwise) loop.

The red tracks provide a run round loop.

The storage tracks give about 50 feet for stock. The longest sidings are just under 7'. The shortest are less than 2'. The up and down loops allow for a couple of longer trains. The run round loop allows a train of 5 coaches +loco to stand on the main (blue) loop, while another train passes. Alternatively it can be used to remarshall stock in the adjacent sidings while a train runs on the main circuit.

 

This shows the left hand side of the storage area, with the main and loops behind, (sorry about the derailment).

 

 

This shows the cause of the derailment, my cardboard dust covers. A bit ungainly, but they should help to reduce the dust build up. Mind you, I need to clean off the old dust at some time.

 

 

This  out of focus picture shows where the loops rejoin/diverge from  the  main circuit, (centre track). The point in the foreground splits it into the factory line to the left, and the station route at the right.

 

 

Finally, a view of the right hand storage sidings, with the main roundy line nearest the camera.

Once the electrics are working satisfactorily, I'll need to do a lot of tidying

 

Any questions?
 

Thanks
 

Dave

Edited August 15, 2022 by unravelled

[unravelled]

Some significant progress today. I have connected the two ends as a temporary roundy, and have run the first trains. So at least I can watch the trains go round while I work on other things. The current plan is to work on the industrial layout  at the back, while waiting for bullhead pointwork to be produced. Maybe some photos later...

 

Thanks

 

Dave

[unravelled]

A couple of photos from today's first circuits.

 

 

This will be developed into a representation of the down Cathedrals express.

 

 

This will be the evening up parcels train, a regular Castle turn.

 

This track alignment will be kept for running for some time. The factory scene behind will be developed, with the potential of being used as an alternative, if unrealistic. roundy route. Finally, this line will be replaced by the not Thame station layout. Many years of fun and learning, I hope.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

Edited August 15, 2022 by unravelled

[MisterT]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for replying to my question about Wheatley.

I followed your signature link to this thread - Wylde - which you seem to be basing on Thame.

I can see that the Wheatley and Thame signal boxes look very similar (in fact, almost identical). Did you ever come across any drawings of the various Thame buildings?

 

Also, how is Wylde progressing?

 

Ed

[Tallpaul69]

Hi to Mister T and Unravelled, who I understand are both working on layouts based on Wheatley/Thame on the Oxford to Princes Risborough line?

 

I may be joining you depending on my reaching an agreement with the Guys building my layout to adopt Thame as the basis of the first stage of my layout.

 

I was working on a layout plan based on Maidenhead, which you can follow on my thread "Lower Thames Yard". However this has been scuppered by the Virus because the layout needed building as one project and the guys felt it too comlex for them to be confident of not falling ill during ther build and potentially not being able to complete it!

I don't have the woodwork, track laying or electrics skills to build it myself, I am a timetabling and operations man!

 

Any way, I will start a new thread called "Maybe Thame", if I go ahead and I will let you know via this thread.

 

Cheers for now

Paul

[Tallpaul69]

Hi All,

Just a quick post to let watchers of this post know that I am definitely proceeding with "Thame" as the first, and self contained phase of a layout instead of "Lower Thames Yard". The full layout will cover Thame and a simplified version of High Wycombe!

 

However, I have yet to start a new thread, so if you want to follow my progress then please look at "Lower Thames Yard"?

 

Best regards

Paul

[Tallpaul69]

Hi Folks,

I thought I would post here as well as on my thread "Lower ThamesYard" a diagram of the signals and a Layout plan for my version of Thame. 

This is a double track version cos I sometimes like to sit and watch the trains go by-at least I will once this is built!

 

The versions on my thread have some explanatory notes:-

 

The signal diagram:-

 

 

The layout track plan:-

 

This ocupies 12ft x 4ft of a 12ft x 8ft railway room. The double junctions at each end lead to the other half of the room which will be filled with 6 long loops as a fiddle yard in front of which will be a simplified version of High Wycombe , screened from the fiddle yard by its characteristic high wall!

 

 

Cheers

Paul

[unravelled]

 Much later...

Progress on Wylde is sporadic. The first significant development relates to the design of   the factory backscene. I am imagining that Lucy's ironworks moved out of Oxford to Thame a lot earlier than they actually did.  They took over a site adjacent to the station and grew a rail served factory complex there. Possibly the rail provision was updated during the war?

 

So I'm supposing they had their own shunting loco, with basic shed and facilities. Incoming would be fuel for the foundry, (coal or coke?), paints,  timber for the pattern makers and for crates. Outgoing would be finished switchgear, crated or not. By the late 50s, lorries would be in use alongside a reduced rail service.
 

One of the consequences of a reduced rail activity, is that a fledgling preservation group has access to space on the system for a few locos saved from the breakers, (I am resisting many of the small locos which made it into industrial use, but not all).
 

I have come up with several  track plans of increasing complexity. The idea is that the foundry is off scene  to the left, (Oxford). On the loading unloading area there are separate bays   for inbound goods at the left and outbound at the right.

 

The upper left track will  disappear through a concealed opening  to extra loco storage off scene. It ends up linking in to the main circuit. The upper right track would ideally be part of a continuous run but I can't see an easy way of concealing this, so it may not feature in the final version. One of the reasons for wanting a continuous run through the factory was to provide a circuit in code 100, to allow older locos to be run, (the station will be in code 75 bullhead). The factory uses up a stock of small  radius points I have.

This area of the layout was finalised and glued down, with points operated by blue point units which will be operated from the front edge of the baseboard. At this stage, the right hand (London) end was left unconnected, while planning continued.

 

Laying the main station was waiting for the arrival of Peco bullhead slips. I had considered using flat bottom versions as placeholders, but soon abandoned that idea. Plans changed with the announcement of British Finescale pointwork kits. After waiting for their release, I bought a couple of kits to try. They were simple to build, and looked so much better. Unfortunately the first B7 releases are just too long for my layout. I will have to wait for the full range of B6 turnouts and crossings before I can proceed. I hope to be using  the 00sf versions.

 

Using one of the British finescale, and a couple of peco points, I have laid out and connected up a plain lined version of the station, so I have something to run trains . I was also  able to join the factory sidings to  the main circuit at the right hand end.

 

This is the view from the Oxford end, of the temporary plain lined track layout.

 

 

This is a rough idea what the final track layout will be, again from the  Oxford end.

 

 

And the reverse view.

 

 

 

The goods shed is a placeholder, it is one of several models I bought about 50 years ago, and which I later realised comes from Torpoint.

 

As well as the layout work, I have been working, on and off,  at drawing up plans for the trainshed and footbridge. I was given a good start on the train shed, thanks to David Bigcheeseplant, who had made drawings of the version at High Wycombe, seen in his recent thread. With his drawings, a few known measurements, and a lot of photos, I set about producing the drawings for Thame. These drawings have gone through many iterations, with steps retraced after wrong assumptions and poor interpretation of grainy photos.

 

I have also been trying out some 3d prints created from these drawings. This is the best so far, for a typical truss/column assembly. For construction they will be aligned with threaded rod through the holes in the bottom rail. The centre section can be broken out for the trackbed after assembly.

 

 

 

 

Thanks
 

Dave

 

Edited August 15, 2022 by unravelled

[unravelled]

Gosh, less than a year since the last post. Patchy progress continues to be made. Most of my effort has been in preparing drawings for the train shed and footbridge. In real life the footbridge must have been shoehorned into the available space. One detail just visible in some photographs is that the columns at the  west end have been narrowed to make room for the stairs. Realising this has made it easier to fit the bits together.

 

 

While I have been able to find a number of useful photos from the internet, David Bigcheeseplant has again been very helpful with photos and drawings, even finding and copying drawings of the footbridge ironwork, which resulted in a major rework of my guesstimations, and drawings which better match the photos..

 

The current phase is working out how to convert these drawings into something which can be built. I have been playing with my Aldi 3D filament printer, and so far my plan is to create truss units, with separate wall/end/roof  panels.After a lot of failed tests I have decided that I will probably print the wall sections as separate inner and outer units, to avoid having to deal with issues with support on double sided structures.

These are some of the more successful  recent prints, shown after a quick spray of primer, both on their own and in front of images of the originals.

 

 

       
 Board and batten siding test

 

Interior framework test

 

 

One obvious thing to do is rotate them 90 degrees in the printer, to orient the finish strands in the wood grain direction. Also some tweaking of the timber widths is needed, as they are a bit heavy at the moment. Trial and error is determining how much detail can be reproduced. To be honest, prints are better than I had expected.

 

For those interested I have been making the many iterations of the drawings in Turbocad, redrawing until levels, widths etc.  match known dimensions and images. The drawings are all being done full size, in inches, as it saves having to convert the known dimensions. It also makes estimating from timber sizes, steps etc. easier for me. At one stage I was considering  transferring finished drawings into Fusion 360, but I am now trying to do it all in Turbocad. I am fairly happy with the 2D part of the process, but learning the 3D'ing process hasn't been as easy as I had hoped. Once I am happy with the 3D drawing I save it from Turbocad  as  an stl file, which I can open with Cura for printing. One of the quirks of some of the file formats is that they make assumptions,  ( or possibly have defaults I have yet to alter). For example, although I draw in inches, the stl file doesn't take that on board, and when I import into  Cura, the image has shrunk by a factor of 1/25.4, because it has assumed the units used are mm. Actually this works to my advantage, as by reducing them to 1/3 the linear size again, they come out at 4mm/ft.

 

The other issue I have been thinking about is pointwork. In making a model close to scale with commercial pointwork, the issue, to me, is not so much about getting the correct details, but close to the correct length for each component. The model should feature  GW 2 bolt chairs and pointwork, and that's not goung to happen! As I posted before, the British finescale B7 kits are just too long for my plans, and the decision now is whether to use the nearish peco slip and crossing, or wait for the b6 range sometime down the line. Peco would do, and was what I expected to use when all this started.  Waiting for the B6s would allow  me to go 00sf in the most visible areas, but I can probably do without that.. For now I will get on with the train shed, and see if the  00sf b6 range  arrives in time.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

[Tallpaul69]

Welcome back Dave, wondered what had happened to your layout.

Meanwhile my version of Thame has progressed, but is no longer on the Oxford to Princes Risborough line instead is providing a fictional station at village of Bradenham on the GW & GC!

The layout has track laid and is operational but the phase 2 I talked about in an earlier post here is just going to be a set of loops because most of the area that was to be loops with High Wycombe in front, is occupied by a completed and scenic, operational end to end that I purchased to have something to use during Covid, Lockdowns etc.!

This is called Wycombe End and will link into one of the double junctions on Bradenham (Thame).

 

I will update you further anon, but you can see some of what I have been up to on my thread "Lower Thames Yard".

 

Best regards

Paul

[unravelled]

The station area  has been dismantled again.  I had compressed the Oxford end to get in a tight off scene curve, and as a result the point at the end of the platform loop was so near the platforms that a down train would have fouled it. I didn't want to shorten the station, and the goods yard area was already shortened, so I needed to gain some room. The solution I decided on was to take the track into the wall cavity, which gave me about  5 more inches. I also made the radius a bit tighter, and used a medium radius point as it would now be off scene. This was not as major as it sounds. When the cellar was dug out, stud walls, (non load bearing), and faced with ply, were installed. I was able to messily cut through the ply and tunnel through the studs to achieve this.

 

 

 

 

Clearly, there is still some neatening up  to do.

 

In order to save having to cut more than was necessary, I needed a way to lay the track accurately in an area of poor accessibility. To do this I drew up and 3d printed track base sections which would hold the peco code 100 firmly.

These are a couple of failed prints, to show how they locate to each other. They were joined together by careful melting with a soldering iron.

 

 

 

This rejig also allowed me to use up some small radius points to  access an unused bit of baseboard, and install a storage yard for locos or railcars.

 

I am now working on the pointwork for the east end of the station.

 

More soon I hope

 

Dave

 

 

 

[Tallpaul69]

Good to see things moving forward on your layout.

Unfortunately most of us find that we could do with just that bit extra space!

I likewise found that one end of my layout was a bit cramped and am currently wrestling with the best form for a road overbridge to act as a scenic break.

Also, since writing my last response to your posting some six months ago, I have  decided to forego the extra storage loops and merely connect Bradenham to Wycombe End  at one end of the layouts as there is as much work as I can realistically undertake in the next couple of years in linking the two layouts and giving Wycombe End fiddle yard, the link board between the two layouts, and the front area of Bradenham scenic treatments.

I just can't see me undertaking the extra work necessary to install and make workable the planned loops.

 

You can see more of what is going on in my railway Room on my thread "Lower Thames Yard".

 

Cheers for now,

Paul    

[unravelled]

Since the last update I have made considerable progress(for me). This started with the removing of all the scenic track through the station, and relaying it to a new alignment, which I think looks much better. This is the current state of play.

 

All the main track is in place, and only the goods yard lines need to be finalised. I made a late decision to put a double slip in the goods yard scissors, rather than back to back points as I had intended. This is harder work to set up, but matches the prototype. There is some evidence that back to back points may have been used at some stage, but I'm not convinced of that. The double slip was the last pointwork purchase, at Ally Pally in March. Since then I have been laying track and wiring points. Almost all points are now wired and motorised. I decided to go for Tortoise  point machines, and these are fitted using a variety of 3d printed mounts. I have most of the wiring above the baseboard for now. It makes for easier modification and testing, but some sort of control panel is intended for the future.

 

 

 

The section from the west bridge to the platform east ends  should be to scale, with severe compression of the rest  This compromises the goods yard length, but I hope I will be able to keep all the features of the prototype. The Peco pointwork has itself provided some useful compression. I have been pleasantly surprised by the robustness of the bullhead track and pointwork, and have successfully adapted some of the items to narrow the track spacing. The only issue I have is the lack of a short crossing. I have had to use a code 75 flat bottom item, and of course the sleepering doesn't match. I have some ideas about that, but flat bottom will get it running. It won't be difficult to swap it out for a better item  should one appear.

 

 

The platforms and other structures are just placeholders to get the feel of the space. There will be a lot of modelling to come.

 

Track was laid with copydex, which made it easy to lift and modify when i made mistakes. It is als quieter than pva, but smellier. Once the electrics are completed, and the last of the track laid, I'll have to learn the art of ballasting, which should be fun.

 

In an effort to get a more realistic model, I made a visit to Thame last week. It was quite easy, a train to Haddenham and Thame parkway, and a short cycle ride to the site, which is part of the Phoenix  cycling and walking trail. I was surprised how much remains. As well as being able to measure up the bridges, there were some other identifiable bits of structure which will help the model. The platform structures are largely intact, with only the slabs removed after closure. One of the things I was able to confirm was that the south siding, at the front of tthe layout, was higher than the platform lines. I had guessed at about a foot difference, and rough measurements showed that this was about right.

 

Time to get back to modelling.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

Edited June 11, 2023 by unravelled

[Tallpaul69]

2 hours ago, unravelled said:

 

The only issue I have is the lack of a short crossing. I have had to use a code 75 flat bottom item, and of course the sleepering doesn't match. I have some ideas about that, but flat bottom will get it running. It won't be difficult to swap it out for a better item  should one appear.

 

Dave,

I had the same problem 2 years ago when short crossings were needed for my Thame based layout.

After, like you code 75s had been used, I came across two code 100 crossings, which I duly purchased .

If I don't need them for an extension currently just under way planning, you are welcome to them.

I will keep you posted!

 

I like your progress and the results of your Thame field trip.

Cheers

Paul