Jump to content
 

Sheffield Exchange, Toy trains, music and fun!


Clive Mortimore
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
34 minutes ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi Clive,

 

There are 63360 inches in a mile so when divided by 76.2 it gives 831.496" for scale mile, a scale quarter for easy timing of trains is 207. 874", this works our a 17' 37/8".

 

Gibbo.

 

You forgot to allow for gravitational pull and rotational twist.

 

Mike.

  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Funny 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi Clive,

 

There are 63360 inches in a mile so when divided by 76.2 it gives 831.496" for scale mile, a scale quarter for easy timing of trains is 207. 874", this works our a 17' 37/8".

 

Gibbo.

I'm loosing the will to live here, so moving on down to a Blue Coach.:maninlove:

  • Funny 4
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi Clive,

 

There are 63360 inches in a mile so when divided by 76.2 it gives 831.496" for scale mile, a scale quarter for easy timing of trains is 207. 874", this works our a 17' 37/8".

 

Gibbo.

Hi Gibbo

 

I drew the layout using Anyrail, and that gives data like how much track you have used not only in bits of Peco streamlined but in length. So what I done was deleted all the track from the plan apart from one of the mainlines. I cannot remember the exact length but it was just under a scale mile. I then calculated how many seconds it would take a train to go round at various scale speeds. I drew a graph and wrote down the speeds and how many seconds. This bit of paper is pinned to the baseboard edge under the clock with a second hand. If I am running a train and I think it is going too fast I time it as it passes the clock and adjust until it goes at a speed I think it should go at.

 

Neither loco was going full belt, both with a 6 coach train will make an AZOOOOOMMMMMERRR look slow.

1695712201_speedchart.png.8bf2c1d79cef08dbd1aa3ba28ff3ed2f.png

Edited by Clive Mortimore
  • Like 8
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

You forgot to allow for gravitational pull and rotational twist.

 

Mike.

Rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag surely ?!?!?

 

Hang on the Reynolds number would be cocked up due to the non-scaleable nature of the fluid dynamics.

 

7 hours ago, Andrew P said:

I'm loosing the will to live here, so moving on down to a Blue Coach.:maninlove:

Does Clive have any plain blue coaches ?

 

I'm sure he has some that display elements of blue.

 

7 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Gibbo

 

I drew the layout using Anyrail, and that gives data like how much track you have used not only in bits of Peco streamlined but in length. So what I done was deleted all the track from the plan apart from one of the mainlines. I cannot remember the exact length but it was just under a scale mile. I then calculated how many seconds it would take a train to go round at various scale speeds. I drew a graph and wrote down the speeds and how many seconds. This bit of paper is pinned to the baseboard edge under the clock with a second hand. If I am running a train and I think it is going too fast I time it as it passes the clock and adjust until it goes at a speed I think it should go at.

 

Neither loco was going full belt, both with a 6 coach train will make an AZOOOOOMMMMMERRR look slow.

1695712201_speedchart.png.8bf2c1d79cef08dbd1aa3ba28ff3ed2f.png

I appear to have met my match, this may be a good thing it may not.

 

Gibbo.

  • Like 5
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, simontaylor484 said:

You appear to have forgotten to allow for the curvature of the Earth 

The bit I struggle with is this; if water finds its level then how can it be that it is either up hill or down hill in all directions ?

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 08/08/2020 at 23:24, Clive Mortimore said:

 

And a good one form the past

 

 

 

 

A certain band that I'm familiar with used that same subway in the video for their biggest hit 

 

 

Andi

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Because the earth is flat, you reely is stoopid, I thought evry fule no that?!!

 

Mike.

I fully agree with Mike. The world is flat, well it is where I live and Mike use to work.

 

And if you want to see the end of the earth, pop on a train to Southminster, then take a stroll up the road to Bradwell on Sea you can see it from there.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 7
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

I fully agree with Mike. The world is flat, well it is where I live and Mike use to work.

 

And if you want to see the end of the earth, pop on a train to Southminster, then take a stroll up the road to Bradwell on Sea you can see it from there.

 

With Immingham at the other end.

 

Mike.

  • Like 1
  • Funny 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have a few class 40s being built from Tri-ang class 37s. I also had some spare Mainline Peak chassis. Unfortunately I had a high failure rate of mainline motors that the spares got used for powering my Peaks. They weren't thrown away. 

 

I also have a box of working motor bogies. In the box are some Lima H0 class 33 bogies that are 33mm wheelbase. I have used them in the past for 8ft 6ins (34mm) bogies as you cannot see the missing 1mm with the side frames on. Now Class 40s and Peaks had a wheelbase between the driving wheels of 8ft +8ft (32mm +32mm), well as the rear wheel set on a Mianline Peak is not driven (it just waggles in mid air) I thought "How about seeing if the H0 33 motor bogie will fit. It does with a bit of butchery. I had one running last night. I now need to make it fit the chassis, I have a plan.

 

Toy trains is fun.

  • Like 12
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
24 minutes ago, cheesysmith said:

I have to pick you up on your grammar there Clive. "Toy trains is fun", really? What you meant to say was "chopping up toy trains is fun".

Yes but no but yes but no but so is zooming them around the train set so overall chopping, unboxing and playing "Toy trains is fun".

 

Even discussing which unrealistic coupling type is the hardest to set up and getting working correctly if you read some threads.

  • Like 6
  • Funny 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Yes Clive equally lovely. Maybe we are all thinking a bit about mortality at the moment? To do so is, to me sensible and life affirming. I put it down to my Irish father who had a great love of Irish music with its mournful (that word again) thread and, in contrast, its celebration of dance and of life. Some say dance = life. I have said enough serious stuff!

 

Kind regards and thanks,

 

Richard B

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Another favorite...tad different

 

 

What punk was about for most of us, having FUN.

 

 

Yes absolutely, I remember this one very well. I suspect that I am a little before your time, 73 in October but still a bit daft and always interested in something new - healthy state of mind.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...