Newcastle Emlyn - Early goods rolling stock

[NCB]

Did the built-as fixed-side wagons have any intermediate strapping or other support? 

As far as I can see the drop-side conversions retained the hinge straps merely to hold the side-planks together.  The actual hinge parts, that originally connected the hinge straps to the curb rails, were removed.

 

 Yep, two bits of reasonably hefty intermediate strapping on each side. Don't look like old hinge straps.  The Quarryscapes bodies in my pic higher up this (previous) page give the idea. Looking at the plans I get the impression that there were corner plates both inside and outside the corner.

 

Re the dates I was getting mixed up with a couple of drop-side plans. One of the fixed side ones is dated 1904 and the other undated. I can't see any difference between them; both show wooden blocks behind the buffers. They're drawings 9015 and 9016 in the NRM OPC lists; the lists describe 9015 as drop-sides but it's not.

 

Nigel

Edited May 2, 2018 by NCB

[Anotheran]

It's been rather a long time since I commented on my own thread here, so I thought I'd better drop in with an update, and also to answer some of the posts that others have been kind enough to contribute.

 

I've not done much in the way of modelling in the last couple of weeks, but I have been doing more wagon research. The result of that was that I've purchased some more kits cheaply on eBay. A few more Coopercraft kits have come my way with plans to backdate some of them. I've also got hold of some Ian Kirk kits that I can also use for the basis of some early wagons. But I'm acutely aware that I'll need to do some heavy modifications, if not complete scratch building, to make up as much of a compliment for 1896 as I have for the later GWR years. More on that all as it happens.

[Anotheran]

P1010448.JPG

Here's all four.  Only now do I realise that I made two loads using 10thou (The ones at each end).  Slates would have been propped against the ends of the wagons because they were heavily braced.  The drop-sides of the wagons would only have been supported by the locking pins at each end and would have given way under the considerable weight....

 

I think those four wagons really look the part. I now have even more inspiration to build a slate load. I may still try one in each direction though as I'm still not convinced that end facing is the only option chosen.

 

Whilst I can follow the logic if you have a drop side wagon, I feel there may be some physical problems when actually loading. I have come across a photo which clearly shows slates being loaded across the wagon, which in this case is a two plank one, with just side doors. The possible major difference is that the wagons in question are Furness Railway ones, being loaded with Westmorland slate, and perhaps the Welsh did things differently! The photo appears in a recent Cumbrian Railways Association publication, An Introduction to Cumbrian Railways.

 

I hope that, at some time, a similar Cambrian photo comes to light. We Welsh do tend to do things differently but Cambrian and Cumbrian are only separated by a single letter and there's still a lot of the Welsh language in the remnants of Cumbrian, though mainly in a pastoral setting. I know we're talking railway companies not countries, but I'd like to think that there are some connections there!

 

Loaded slates... Fixed sides.. Somewhere in the back of my mind I recall an article on the LNWR exchange sidings at Blaenau Ffestiniog which showed the standard gauge wagons loaded with slate, it may have been a HMRS or LNWR Society publication.

The static 'preserved' wagons at Blaenau Ffestiniog have the slates stacked along the length of the narrow gauge wagons, contrary to period photo's like this one.

And as I've mentioned before, just because a wagon has sides that can be dropped, it doesn't mean they have to be 

sLATE #2.jpg

I like that picture a lot. They're showing the slates lifted over the sides for loading... even on what I believe is a drop side lorry. They're also loaded facing the sides on the NG wagons. However, on the lorry they're facing the ends, which could back up Mike's earlier comment about the bracing not being there on the drop sides... tyres instead of tracks, but similar loading issues.

 

Thank you for all of the input on this one so far. As I said above I'm going to have tor try both and see what I like best, or keep both!

 

Kind regards, Neil

[Anotheran]

Many thanks to all for the erudite discussion on loading slates in Cambrian Railway wagons. i have a strong feeling that such a wagon and load will be on its way to Nantcwmdu soon to provide roofs for eyen more miners' houses.

 

Everyone should have a CamRys wagon load of top quality Welsh slates!

[DLT]

Pentrefan was thrown together in too much of a hurry for a dedicated thread to have been created.  The nearest it got was a mention on page two of the Cambrian Layouts thread, which at the moment is down near the foot of the opening page of the Railways of Wales section. 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/83601-cambrian-layouts/page-2

 

At the moment the layout is in a partly-dismantled state, having been retired from the exhibition circuit after just four shows because I found exhibiting far too stressful to be enjoyable.  It was my first exhibition layout and building it was an extremely steep learning curve.  There was a lot I got right - it looked very pretty and considering how small and simple it was it offered a surprising amount of operational interest.  We were even able to indulge in gravity shunting! - but there was also a lot I got wrong.  The sector plate in particular was a pain.  Where it stuck out beyond the end of the layout it was extremely prone to being knocked, despite being painted fluorescent pink.  Being so close to the rear edge of the layout also caused problems when set to the hidden return siding, the lack of space and the resulting sharp angles causing alignment problems.

The final straw was a brief clip of it at what turned out to be its final show appearing on YouTube.  Pointwork is the weakest of my many weak points (Everything that runs on any layout of mine has to have suspension of some sort if it is not to take to the ballast on a regular basis) but I didn't realise just how bad my track was until I watched footage of every wagon lurch across every rail joint!

(Pentrefan appears at 9.10 and ends forty seconds later.  Don't mention the gutter hanging off.  I did once, but I think I got away with it)

 

 

Pentrefan looks lovely and seemed to be running very well in that clip.  It certainly doesn't look as if it was thrown together in a hurry!

But if you are unhappy with it's shortcomings, then you are doing the right thing by rebuilding.

Exhibition operating can be demanding and tiring, especially on a shunting layout, but I'm sorry to hear that you found it too stressful, I hope that the rebuilding will help to cure this. 

I hope I get to see this layout one day,

Best wishes,

Dave.

[ChrisN]

Everyone should have a CamRys wagon load of top quality Welsh slates!

 

I of course will never have a CamRys wagon loaded with top quality Welsh Slates. No No NO!  (That livery was at least 5 years after my period. ) 

[Regularity]

Pentrefan was thrown together in too much of a hurry...

 ...At the moment the layout is in a partly-dismantled state...

The final straw was a brief clip of it at what turned out to be its final show appearing on YouTube.  Pointwork is the weakest of my many weak points (Everything that runs on any layout of mine has to have suspension of some sort if it is not to take to the ballast on a regular basis) but I didn't realise just how bad my track was until I watched footage of every wagon lurch across every rail joint!

 

I watched that video intently and I think the compensation on the Vauxhall P.O. wagon is “sticky”, I.e. not rocking freely. I suspect this as a couple of mine are prone to this problem. Otherwise, I think you are your own worst critic: the running was what I would expect to see with rocking w-iron suspension, and was representative of real wagons around a goods yard where the track is less than perfect - so if your track is less than perfect, it makes for a perfect replica! Lurching? No. Just the odd bump.

Nothing came off the rails, and the engine started and stopped smoothly, so all was good.

 

I like that you feel this not to be your best work. Yet. You obviously think you can do better next time, so do so, but this time round was pretty good so you have set yourself a tough target!

[mike morley]

I I think the compensation on the Vauxhall P.O. wagon is “sticky”, I.e. not rocking freely.

 

The massive majority of my rolling stock is compensated, mostly using either MJT or EM Gauge society rocking W irons.  Of the rest I have one that uses MRD torsion springing (Massively OTT and requiring a very heavy wagon - in this case a lumpen David Geen whitemetal NER covered van - to make it work).  A couple that use a much simplified version of torsion springing that I invented myself and a handful that use Bill Beford springing.  At ExpoEM I bought one of Prickly Pear's springing systems to try soon.

My best-running wagon by some distance is one of the Bill Bedford sprung ones (It has to be permanently coupled to a not-so-free-running wagon if it's to stay parked where the loco leaves it when shunting) but I have noticed in the past that any Limping Lulus are invariably Bill Bedford wagons with a stuck slider.

Following Regularities observations I checked my Vauxhall wagons and, surprise surprise, both have Bill Bedford springing with sliders that are stuck!

Thanks for the hint!

Edited June 10, 2018 by mike morley

[Regularity]

Thanks for the hint!

Based entirely on resonance experience!

There is a fine line between “just-so” and either too sloppy or too tight, frequently nothing more than one more or one fewer, stroke of the file.

[Anotheran]

Right, so after a year with nothing on the thread I thought I should make an attempt here instead of just the occasional comment on others. I have made a little progress on some kits and having taken photos as I've gone along will post them in due course. However, everything is at the moment in boxes as we've moved house!

 

So before I get into any more modelling here I'd like to ask for some advice. Our new house has a nice double garage, and I'm going to be able to use half of it as a railway room. The other half will be workshop and garden storage etc (no cars of course in a modern garage). This is contingent on moving all the "stuff" currently in boxes in there into the loft that we've had properly boarded. I'm going to put a stud wall down the middle of the garage with a door between the two halves. All walls and ceiling (of the railway side) will be insulated with PIR (the front "wall" blocking the up and over door will be removable in two or three sections to ease getting large items in and out should I ever be in a position to show any of my work). I'm going to put in a false floor, also insulated. So here's my question...

 

The garage floor slopes down back to front (to make sure any water running off cars - as if anyone would ever keep them in a garage - flows out under the door) by 85 mm over its 6.1 m length. Would the consensus of opinion be that I should make the false floor level (so rising from 90 mm above the concrete at the back to 175 mm above it at the front) so making it easy to keep the layouts level with little work OR do I keep the floor simple with the slope and level the layouts inside (NE will run the full length of the garage so would need to handle the full 85 mm difference in its legs)? My gut says level the floor, but what have others done, or think should be done?

 

If anyone is actually still following this rather moribund thread then thank you... and I'll eagerly await any response!

Kind regards, Neil

[Fat Controller]

My inclination (sorry!) would be to keep the floor level.

[ChrisN]

Neil,

I have some feet on the end of my legs, obviously, but the legs are on my layout and the feet are ones that screw in and out for levelling.  I think though that they would struggle to cope with nearly four inches.  (I suppose it might just be 85mm when you are running 1960s stock).  You would need to lengths, at least, of leg so if you are putting a false floor in then it may be easier to keep it level.  I would still put adjustable feet in as well, just for safety and if you ever want to exhibit.

[westerhamstation]

Hi Neil,  I would go with a false floor and as Chris said adjustable legs, a false floor will give you extra warmth on your feet and as you walk the length of the layout your eye line won't alter by

85mm. All the best and good to see you back Adrian.

[petejones]

I've been reading this whole thread with much interest! I moved to Pembrokeshire just over two years ago and Newcastle Emlyn is about 13 miles from where I live (not that it matters a dot as there ain't a railway station there no more!). But I did like the look of the track plan when I was looking around the web the last week for a suitable termini to model. After coming across this thread and seeing your dedication to the station, I will look elsewhere as there is no point duplicating efforts (or was that stealing other people's work? ).

 

Anyway, my other hobby is tabletop wargaming and I have quite a few years of kit assembling, figure painting and scenery painting under my belt. A couple of (hopefully) useful ideas:

 

1. Humbrol Decalfix is excellent for applying decals to models and doesn't require a gloss coat, although a coat of gloss varnish followed by one of matt varnish over the top of the decals, will finish them off nicely.

 

2. Humbrol recently brought out a new product called Clearfix. I've not tried it yet as it only arrived in the post yesterday, but you use it to fix glazing to model kits and it doesn't mark the glazing, apparently. I will be attaching acetate to the insides of all of the windows in my buildings (something wargamers tend to overlook, perhaps they assume all the glass has been blown out in a previous battle?), so am keen to see if this works. Will let you know how I get on.

 

3. You could try using small neodymium magnets to attach the roofs to the wagons: cheap from ebay:

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Small-magnets-tiny-neodymium-discs-2mm-3mm-4mm-5mm-6mm-strong-craft-magnet-disk/162003918151?hash=item25b82f9d47:m:m_euh7sVwz52cj2XuHdtF4g&frcectupt=true

 

Cheers

Pete

Edited June 19, 2019 by petejones
Added another idea

[petejones]

I found an interesting article on The Carmarthen & Cardigan Railway in Railway World Feb 1973 on ebay:

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Railway-World-Feb-1973-Preservation-SDJR-Carmarthen-Cardigan-Photos/202647723503

 

As the chap has the article on his listing, here it is!

 

 

[corneliuslundie]

i hope the garage idea works out. I am commenting because before I moved abroad in 2007 I had for some years been building a layout in the garage of a town house - so no need to go outdoors to get to it. But I found that I rarely went down there and progress was very slow, no layout completed in 25 years.

I now have a much smaller modelling room but six feet from the kitchen. I can actually do those two-minute modelling jobs such as adding a couple of transfer letters or a glued joint while waiting for the kettle to boil. I am getting much more done than in the previous house - even if my thread doesn't seem to indicate it.

Jonathan

[Anotheran]

On 17/06/2019 at 16:02, Fat Controller said:

My inclination (sorry!) would be to keep the floor level.

Thanks Brian, and no need to apologise for exactly the same sort of humour as I'd have used!

 

On 17/06/2019 at 19:07, ChrisN said:

I have some feet on the end of my legs, obviously, but the legs are on my layout and the feet are ones that screw in and out for levelling.  I think though that they would struggle to cope with nearly four inches.  (I suppose it might just be 85mm when you are running 1960s stock).  You would need to lengths, at least, of leg so if you are putting a false floor in then it may be easier to keep it level.  I would still put adjustable feet in as well, just for safety and if you ever want to exhibit.

Thank you Chris. I'll definitely have adjustable feet anyway and the exhibition element is something that I want to keep in mind if I ever get a completed layout and it's ever actually good enough. But I'll also want the feet adjustable just to take into account my level floor building skills, and also the potential for other house moves that would have different floors with different flaws.

 

On 18/06/2019 at 08:01, westerhamstation said:

Hi Neil,  I would go with a false floor and as Chris said adjustable legs, a false floor will give you extra warmth on your feet and as you walk the length of the layout your eye line won't alter by 85mm. All the best and good to see you back Adrian.

Thanks Adrian. The false floor is definitely happening for exactly the reason of warmth. It was just the question of levelling it or not. Your comment on eye line changing gave me a mad couple of minutes as I went back to the map. The road (following the original landscape) falls away by 20' from west to east over the length of the area I plan to model... That's 80mm. So I could have the landscape datum parallel to the floor and build the railway on the level through it... Just like they did with the real one. Then I thought about all the problems I'd have if the layout ever had to be assembled on a floor that didn't fall away by exactly the right amount over the right distance and the moment came to a quick end!

 

So levelling the floor is the way to go. Once I've moved most of the boxes currently stored in there from the move into the loft.

Edited June 24, 2019 by Anotheran

[timbowilts]

42 minutes ago, Anotheran said:

 Your comment on eye line changing gave me a mad couple of minutes as I went back to the map. The road (following the original landscape) falls away by 20' from west to east over the length of the area I plan to model... That's 80mm. So I could have the landscape datum parallel to the floor and build the railway on the level through it... Just like they did with the real one. Then I thought about all the problems I'd have if the layout ever had to be assembled on a floor that didn't fall away by exactly the right amount over the right distance and the moment came to a quick end!

There is absolutely no reason why you can’t build your layout to reflect the actual ground profile, even on a level floor. You just have to treat it as two elements and not build a traditional “flat” baseboard frame.

Tim T

Modelling South Wales branches in EM

[Anotheran]

On 19/06/2019 at 17:15, petejones said:

I've been reading this whole thread with much interest! I moved to Pembrokeshire just over two years ago and Newcastle Emlyn is about 13 miles from where I live (not that it matters a dot as there ain't a railway station there no more!). But I did like the look of the track plan when I was looking around the web the last week for a suitable termini to model. After coming across this thread and seeing your dedication to the station, I will look elsewhere as there is no point duplicating efforts (or was that stealing other people's work? ).

A couple of (hopefully) useful ideas:

1. Humbrol Decalfix is excellent for applying decals to models and doesn't require a gloss coat...

2. Humbrol recently brought out a new product called Clearfix...

3. You could try using small neodymium magnets to attach the roofs to the wagons

Hi Pete and welcome to NE. I'm very jealous of your move. We were looking to move for quite some time before our latest move and much of Wales was in our target area as we both work predominantly from home. However, for this occasion the fact that the kids were in an excellent school and a house that while it didn't have the land we wanted and from my point of view was about 200 years too modern was a good size for us meant that we moved just across town instead of over to the right side of the border.

 

If you like NE then please don't be concerned about doing the same location... though you'd probably get it finished well before me! There are others not far from you that could also be good candidates. Llandyssil (spelled the way it was on the maps of the time) Station, for example. Though a through station on the Newcastle Emlyn branch for most of it's life it was for a while the terminus with the required engine shed and turntable etc. (See the bottom right corner of https://maps.nls.uk/view/135192835 which is the 25" map of the area in the late 1880s). I did consider this before going for NE. It was very close for a while to remaining as the terminus as there was a good chance that the extension to NE never got built. In theory NE should have gone through the same transition as the line was meant to be extended again to it's original target destination of Cardigan. So you could start off in the real world and easily take it forward as the terminus right through to the 1960s. Or of course you could model it pre-1872 in broad gauge!

 

Although I've not used Humbrol Decalfix I do use a similar product called Micro Sol that is excellent for applying decals to all sorts of surfaces. Clearfix sounds like it could be useful when I get to the point of glazing something (most of my unstarted kits are wagons of one type or another). As for neodymium magnets, I already really like them. But hadn't thought of them for the roofs of wagons. That sounds like a good idea where the friction fit just doesn't work, and it will add a little much needed weight to them (albeit a little higher up than I'd normally place it!)

 

On 21/06/2019 at 11:51, petejones said:

I found an interesting article on The Carmarthen & Cardigan Railway in Railway World Feb 1973 on ebay:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Railway-World-Feb-1973-Preservation-SDJR-Carmarthen-Cardigan-Photos/202647723503

I like the article it's a better summary than I've seen elsewhere. There is a longer article in one of the GWR Journals that I refer to earlier in the thread. I can't recall which number at the moment. I also have the Manchester and Milford railway book which has some detail on the NE branch and it's history.

 

Whatever you do decide to model please do start a thread. As you can see from this one  it can generate a lot of ideas from a lot of knowledgeable people even if not much modelling gets done!

 

Kind regards, Neil

[Anotheran]

5 minutes ago, timbowilts said:

There is absolutely no reason why you can’t build your layout to reflect the actual ground profile, even on a level floor. You just have to treat it as two elements and not build a traditional “flat” baseboard frame.

I completely agree Tim and that is the plan. The moment of madness came when I realised that the drop in the garage floor was actually the same as the drop on the prototype! I fully intend to reflect the actual ground profile, but I will be starting with a level floor!

 

Kind regards, Neil

[Anotheran]

 

On 22/06/2019 at 06:51, corneliuslundie said:

i hope the garage idea works out. I am commenting because before I moved abroad in 2007 I had for some years been building a layout in the garage of a town house - so no need to go outdoors to get to it. But I found that I rarely went down there and progress was very slow, no layout completed in 25 years.

I now have a much smaller modelling room but six feet from the kitchen. I can actually do those two-minute modelling jobs such as adding a couple of transfer letters or a glued joint while waiting for the kettle to boil. I am getting much more done than in the previous house - even if my thread doesn't seem to indicate it.

Thanks for the comment Jonathan.

 

I did think that about the garage but really don't have room for a layout even in the new house. However, I work from home and my office is 2.7m x 2.6m. In here at one end I have my work desk including PCs, printer etc and at the other end I have my modelling table. So rolling stock, buildings, trees etc will all be built in here. There's even enough space that I'll be able to bring in one of the 4 x 3 (reverting to feet now!) boards of the layout itself to work on. So the only work that will be conducted in the garage will be where it's needed for the whole length to be up at once. I may even bring a kettle into the room!

 

The room will also be large enough for some dioramas and I plan to do some of the buildings for NE in that format first as it means I can get a "layout" completed while still heading for the full station... Here's my first diorama plan which I hadn't planned to share just yet, but your comment made me think this was a good pace to put it! The reason I've picked this rather than the station building (for example) is that it has the engine shed that I've already started together with some of the technology (like the turntable and a signal) together with some trees, water and some big variations in height.

 

 

Kind regards, Neil

 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Anotheran
Adding back images lost by site change

[ChrisN]

Neil,

Double click on the picture and press the 'back' button to remove it.

[Anotheran]

12 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

Double click on the picture and press the 'back' button to remove it.

Hi Chris, thanks for looking.

That works to remove the pictures in the post, but the unwanted one that I've uploaded in error and deleted from the body of the post (using the method you state here) remain visible below the post (the big copy of the plan) once it's saved. I want to remove this unwanted image from the uploaded images list so that it doesn't do that. I've posted the query in the help forum, so will hopefully have an answer eventually.

Kind regards, Neil

Edited June 24, 2019 by Anotheran

[ChrisN]

8 minutes ago, Anotheran said:

Hi Chris, thanks for looking.

That works to remove the pictures in the post, but the unwanted one that I've uploaded in error and deleted from the body of the post (using the method you state here) remain visible below the post (the big copy of the plan) once it's saved. I want to remove this unwanted image from the uploaded images list so that it doesn't do that. I've posted the query in the help forum, so will hopefully have an answer eventually.

Kind regards, Neil

 

Neil,

I am sure I did the same to remove the upload a week or so ago, but that was before I had hit 'Submit Reply'.

[Anotheran]

36 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

I am sure I did the same to remove the upload a week or so ago, but that was before I had hit 'Submit Reply'.

Thanks Chris. When I double click on the image in the uploads list it just inserts it twice into the body of the post. If I get an answer from the help forum I'll post it as I regularly see posts that clearly have the same problem.