Launceston Branch: Horrabridge

[Brinkly]

Morning Nick,

Found your thread thanks to a comment by AndyP elsewhere on RMweb so don't be surprised when a few 'likes' suddenly appear from a stranger! Most impressed so far and as my own modelling is unlikely to start till the end of the year due to illness, I shall look on with great interest! Can you tell me what thickness ply Maurice used on the track bed surfaces? Thank you for the inspiration,

Kind regards,

Jack.

 

Thanks for your interest Jack, I'm glad that the thread has been useful so far; I hope it continues to be! 

 

Maurice has used a range of ply for the boards. The track bed is 6mm, supported by 12mm for the main super structure (internal rectangle and profile), with 8mm, 6mm & 4mm for other parts such as the curved sections, front and internal supports. What I will do is photograph the undersides of the boards next week and label the different sections. Maurice is very good at carpentry, knocks spots of my earlier attempts!

 

Regards,

 

Nick. 

[Brinkly]

Saturday 9th August 2014 - Progress to date

 

Not a huge amount of detailed work to report today, mostly preparation work for track laying which will take place after Railwells tomorrow. I realised on Thursday that the switch blades that I thought were nickel silver, were in fact steel. Originally I had intended to use steel rail, but decided against early on as the short lengths that I have at home seem to have been attacked by tin worm! So I've opted for Hi-Nickel rail from C&L.

 

So far 6m of rail - cut into 50cm sections - have been prepared with chairs arrange into 45ft panels. I thought that 60ft panels would be correct, although thankfully Tim Venton came to the rescue on the Scalefour Forum saying 'Count the sleepers'. Closer inspection has revealed that 45ft (16 sleeper) panels are more accurate for Horrabridge. I'm very fortunate that over the past 6 years of researching the layout I have plenty of photographs showing the station and others along the line. Tavistock South, Horrabridge, Yelverton, Bickleigh and Marshmills all have the older 1921 style sections, so I've opted for this version. 

 

This morning I have made a basic jig to aid with sleeper spacing. Lots of them appear on the net, but I have built one similar to Geoff F of Penhydd and Llangunllo fame.

 

I've also drawn the outer rail on the cork bed with the aid of long glass headed pins and a length of old steel rail.

 

 

I've also started to build a B7 point, which starts just after the bridge. About 4 years ago I obtained a number of Exactoscale B7 sleeper bases. As this is only the second point that I have built using plastic parts, I thought the location pips would be helpful! I have very gently curved the base in line with the Templot plan drawn by Rod Cameron. I don't think the pips on the inner curve will cause a problem with the gauge being to narrow, but if it does I will recover the rail and use C&L sleepers on the new version!  - Photo to follow.

 

Once again thanks for reading.

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

 

Edit - Typo

Edited August 9, 2014 by Brinkly

[westerner]

It hasn't been any sort of storm. Nor has anything been criticized, or anyone taken umbrage. Or any of the other negative suggestions in recent posts.

 

RMweb is a strange place -- I've noticed this tendency before. Unless you post "yes, me too, that's wonderful" someone is determined to see some great confrontation or disagreement -- and then make a post urging that it should be ignored.

 

We had a friendly and I hope intelligent discussion about two different approaches to model railway building. A discussion, no more. That's what a forum web site exists for.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

I Probably expressed my self badly with the phrase "storm in a tea cup". I would agree with you that your posts and subsequent posts were a sensible discussion, and I certainly did not think anyone was ranting. I hope in the past when I have offered sensible suggestions that they were not taken the wrong way.

 

I apologise Martin if you thought I was "having a go". I wasn't.

[brianusa]

The best part about sharing ones hobby is that we all can learn a lot whether or not we share the same interest.  Lets face it, my particular train layout is far from the classic scale branch line here modelled but I have gleaned a lot from Horrabridge that I was not familiar with and also the prototype.  Quite possibly, had this layout been set  anywhere else, there would not be much interest for me but this area was my old stamping ground.  So please carry on as I welcome all aspects of the discussion.

 

Brian.

[Brinkly]

It is such a small world Brian! This is the benefit of the web.

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

[mudmagnet]

Good to meet and chat today Nick.

Following with interest.

All model railways are a comprise somewhere and you need to decide where to make those comprises to suit your vision of the finished article. Other people's comments can be useful and sometimes allow you to see things more clearly.

 

Richard

[westerner]

Thinking about that curve through the platforms I can just imagine a rather battered Class22 trundling through with a couple of wagons and a toad.

[Captain Kernow]

I can't upload photos etc. from the computer I'm currently using, but could the whole 'platform on a curve' thing be served by running the two platform lines even further 'north' of Martin's red line, so that the topmost platform line might run through where the station buildings are currently shown, or maybe a bit further higher up, thus ensuring that the line remains on a continuous curve through the station?

I've just realised that this suggestion is about as much use as half a pound of out of date sausages, because the main station buildings (which in reality are on the outside of the curve), are on the inside of the circuit on the layout. As such, the Iain Rice plan is really the only way to replicate this...

[bgman]

Single gentleman at present Brian! My house, my rules!

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

Happy days! It's a great feeling just leaving it where you decide to and no one moans !!!

 

Now where did I put my ............

 

Great stuff, nice to know Iain is still doing his magic

 

Grahame

[Tim Dubya]

This looks absolutely stunning already Nick, I'll be following this one with great interest!

Cheers

[slow8dirty]

OOh!

 

I remember you getting it out at one of the members days

 

The plan that it is......,

 

great to see things are now moving along will watch with interest.

 

Cheers,

 

Matt

[Brinkly]

OOh!

 

I remember you getting it out at one of the members days

 

The plan that it is......,

 

great to see things are now moving along will watch with interest.

 

Cheers,

 

Matt

Must have been a couple of years ago! Haha

 

Thanks for your interest.

 

Regards,

Nick.

[RailWest]

'Catch' points are trailing, 'trap' points are facing - simples!

 

I can confirm that the Blue Anchor example is still there and springing away every day :-) There used to be quite a few examples of that arrangement on both the Minehead and Barnstaple branches, but BA is all that is left now. The one at South Molton was even better, as it was on a loop line signalled for bi-redirectional running and so had a FPL as well as the 'slot' !

 

I agree with Stationmaster that the specific mention about the Clearing Point at BA is rather unusual, but his suggestion about nomenclature is as good a theory as any :-)

[37114]

Will definitely follow this, looks like it will be a cracking layout.

[Brinkly]

Wednesday 20th August 2014 - Progress to date

 

Yelverton (Bridge) Point

 

Greetings,

 

Despite working on some wagons, work on the layout has continued. There have been a couple of delays, the first being the discovery of steel rail switch blades, rather than hi-nickel silver and I couldn't find some of my track gauges. The gauges were found, although one triangular gauge was missing. I ordered a new one from the Scalefour Stores, which arrived this morning, so work on the track has begun again.

 

Below is a photograph of the real thing, not quite as curved and going the other way.

 

The Templot plan and an old Exactoscale B7 chair template have been very useful. As you can see I have constructed the point 'off-board', which is much more comfortable and has enabled a fair amount of tweaking.

 

This turnout has been made from C&L and Exactoscale parts; rail and sleepers are C&L and chairs are Exactoscale products. Something I decided to do was purchase machined switchblades and common-crossings for the visible parts of the layout. I do jointly own a jig with Taz, but felt I would cheat to start with! One thing I had to do was slightly alter the wing rails on the common crossing as one wing was creating a 'knock' forcing the wagon on the outer rail to bang over to the right. I carefully unsoldered the rail, move it out a fraction and all is fine! No bumps, knocks, wobbles or problems. Stock passes through very smoothly and I'm really pleased that it wasn't quite as difficult as I feared.

 

A couple of resources have been really useful. First is Iain Rice's track book. Well worth a tenner; mine was less as it came from eBay. And the handbuilt track section on the forum. Hayfield's thread is particularly good.

First up a selection of gauges in use. The roller gauges are Exactoscale and the two triangular ones are from the Scalefour Stores, although I think Alan Gibson stocks them.

You can see the copper clad sleepers clearly here. I've copied CK's method of putting a small piece of brass between the sleeper and the railhead to raise it up enough to fit a cosmetic chair more easily. Bit of a labour of love, but it does work. (Excuse the mess of the bench!)

Nearly finished - lots of checking so far, with just the last Slide Chairs to fit.

This view is taken from the hill side, the level crossing being to the left of the photo! (You do have to use your imagination a bit!)

 

Anyway tomorrow I plan to install this on the appropriate board and see if it still works.

 

Thanks for reading. Kind regards,

Nick.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Brinkly

[Mallard60022]

You must have now discovered how theraputic point building is can be? I really like the idea of the soldered frog/vee area and that little tip about using a 'sliver' so that the rail height matches when you then use the chairs on the wooden sleepers.

Are you going to use copper clad on other 'stress' areas and did you 'joggle'.

The job looks really smart.

The Track Building DVD with Norman Soloman is also very good if you have not seen it. Some excellent tips on tracklaying. PM me if you want to borrow it.

Phil

[Brinkly]

You must have now discovered how theraputic point building is can be? I really like the idea of the soldered frog/vee area and that little tip about using a 'sliver' so that the rail height matches when you then use the chairs on the wooden sleepers.

Are you going to use copper clad on other 'stress' areas and did you 'joggle'.

Hi Phil,

 

Thanks for your post. The 'silver' is one tip that I picked up from Tim (CK) a few years ago on the last version of RMWeb. It does work, although the tip on my iron is on the way out, so making a very clean job is quite tricky. Something I need to do is buy a new tip for the iron as I think that would really help.

 

In total I've replace 12 sleepers with copper clad, the ends of the point, V and anchoring the switch blades. I distressed the sleepers with a file and I think once painted one won't see the difference.

 

The Track Building DVD with Norman Soloman is also very good if you have not seen it. Some excellent tips on tracklaying. PM me if you want to borrow it.

 

Thank you for the offer, I might take you up on that later. I watched Brian's (Taz) copy a couple of years ago and it is a very good. We also have first hand Soloman track at DRAG which he laid on Mike Casey's Bodmin, so I had a good look at that last weekend!

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

[Tim V]

Nick

 

A small tip, when I build track, I put the check rails on last after I've tweaked the points so they work. If the geometry is right, they are superfluous!

[Joseph_Pestell]

First time I have looked at this thread. Never mind a few compromises, this is going to be a great layout. It's very rare that someone with that much space to use for a model builds something uncomplicated which will look so much more right in consequence.

 

I know Horrabridge a bit because friends (now in Perth WA) lived there for a few years. I'm even wondering if their house may not have been on the site of the station. Will have to take a look at old-maps.co.uk to check.

[martin_wynne]

A small tip, when I build track, I put the check rails on last after I've tweaked the points so they work. If the geometry is right, they are superfluous!

 

This is a common fallacy and it is not true. Check rails are not superfluous, however correct the geometry. They are essential. Without them the wheel flanges can and will hit the nose of the vee and either bump or derail. This is especially true where the crossing is in the outer rail of a curve, or when a long train of vehicles are being propelled (pushed).

 

There are beginners on here and it is not fair to give them duff information.

 

Martin.

[Tim V]

Sorry Martin, I object to your assertion that it is "duff" information. If the point is correctly built, most stock will run through without the check rails. When the builder is happy that they have built the point satisfactorily (and here I will say that Templot will not in any way help) and that most stock will run through, then put the check rails in. It helps with fine tuning pointwork, along with a Mint gauge for example. As a builder of many points, I can speak with some knowledge.

[martin_wynne]

Sorry Martin, I object to your assertion that it is "duff" information. If the point is correctly built, most stock will run through without the check rails. When the builder is happy that they have built the point satisfactorily (and here I will say that Templot will not in any way help) and that most stock will run through, then put the check rails in. It helps with fine tuning pointwork, along with a Mint gauge for example. As a builder of many points, I can speak with some knowledge.

 

I disagree strongly. Running a few choice items of stock through without check rails on the bench may be helpful but could be very misleading. Far more important is to fit the check rails and then confirm that they are working correctly.

 

What is most certainly not the case is that check rails are ever superfluous.*

 

I spent several years manufacturing pointwork for customers, so I can also speak with some knowledge.

 

*except of course for swing-nose crossings, American self-guarding frogs, and switch-diamond K-crossings. None of which are relevant here.

 

Martin.

Edited August 21, 2014 by martin_wynne

[BlackRat]

One assumes the prototype is correct with the geometry through point work.

 

The prototype always has check rails, so how would they be superfluous?

Edited August 21, 2014 by BlackRat

[Brinkly]

I can see where both of you are coming from. I fitted the check rails last, having tested and run some stock through, all seemed well. 

 

I had more difficulty with the knuckle rails and wing rail to run smoothly, despite it being a C&L pre-made common crossing. The wing rail on the through line (right hand track) was not quite in the right place. I've got a couple more, so I'm hoping that was a one off.

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

[nest]

Afraid I know nothing about building points so can't add much there, however this all looks very good and I'll be following with interest.

 

Nestor