Helston Revisited

[Andy Keane]

Having thought again about building a model of Helston Station in Cornwall and having been so much encouraged by the Helstonish Cartoon topic of Tony (Mulgabill http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/115712-a-cartoon-of-helstonish/ ) I thought rather than pollute his topic I had best set up one of my own.

I am in no hurry to finish this layout but as I near retirement and with my first Grandson in place now seems a good time to be doing this. I first started modelling Helston in 1972 with a query for help in Railway Modeller leading me to Pat English's articles in the 1967 issues of Model railway News. This lead me to flooring my parents attic, creating baseboards and starting on the track. I had previously had Hornby stuff but wanted better control of the layout so decided to scratch build the track. 50 years later and I still have the points from that early build:

 

 

This time around I think I will use Peco streamline 100 for most of the layout, but may still build a couple of the points by hand to get the entrance to the station correct as per the large scale OS map of the track.

 

Edited April 6, 2022 by Andy Keane
updated track plan

[Andy Keane]

 

The 1905 map (now out of copyright) shows the initial track layout but I plan for somewhen in the 1930s when the branch was laid out a little differently and worked by 45xx engines. According  to my measurements the track radius under the bridge was about 1000 feet with most of the points at that end having radii of around 500 feet, while those at the carriage shed end are around 300 feet. The Peco large radius turnouts of 381 feet are thus a compromise and apart from the first two on entering the station I will live with this. The whole station will fit onto three six foot by three foot boards which I plan to be portable so as not to cause issues with my local planning authority. I anyway will start by making buildings this time, beginning with the engine shed.

Edited April 6, 2022 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

To build the engine shed I am converting Pat English's drawings to CAD and will then get bits laser cut from the CAD:

Locos will be some of the following: 4407, 4503, 4523, 4525, 4561, 4569 or 4571. In addition to the main branch locomotives, a 58xx tank, 5812 occupied the sub-shed at Helston in the 1930s as well. When I started on this shed back then its entrance door was very tight for height so may adjust that to allow for the actual track and engines I will have, though from photos it is clear getting a 45xx in there would have been very tight in reality.

Edited April 6, 2022 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

The work on the CAD of the shed progresses.

I have completed the structure.

 

The roof trusses are overscale but will not be visible and I want them to be quite strong.

I am now drawing up the stonework so that this can be etched onto the sides by the laser at the same time as cutting.

This is slow work:

 

Edited April 6, 2022 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

New rolling stock in place for sizing engine and carriage shed entrances. Samhongsa RTR 45xx plus pair of Hornby brake 'B' coaches as typically used for the branch.

 

Edited April 6, 2022 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

CAD mockup of the station throat. I am trying to get the placement of track and bridge to look a bit like the photos in the book.

I think this shows why it is better to scratch build the first two points - these are PECO code 100 large radii at the moment.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Andy Keane

[Mulgabill]

Hi Andy there's some progress in this pic.

 

A few observations, if I may.

I suspect the key to this area lies in the overall radius of the curve from platform, to bridge.

The larger the radius, the more room for the shed. That's a bit counter intuitive, but it increases

the distance from behind the shed, to the point. In which you can site the shed building etc.

 

On the running lines, the 1st 2 points are better curved, rather than straight. But will certainly

be better still if custom built.

 

But another consideration may be the question of gradients.  On mine I have a slight gradient

built in towards the bridge. It is quite a characteristic, and was used for shunting coaching stock,

at busy times. But I didn't counter this with the stone siding, and so hoppers can gravitate to foul

the chute siding point!

 

And by the way, I meant to say the prairie and B set looked nice. (Are they without the extra

window found on the Airfix et al offering?

 

All the best

TONY

[Stubby47]

Have you considered slightly bending a long straight point ? Coachman did this quite successfully on several of his abandoned layouts.

 

I think you just cut out several of the webbing links and then gently curve 'everything'.

 

Not sure this would give you the curve you require, but might be easier than scratch building. 

[Andy Keane]

As I already scratch built an OO set 50 years ago and still have them I may see what I can make of them. But yes I had wondered about modifying the PECO points. And actually I think the above CAD version uses the large curved PECO points (I have tried both). Maybe a gentle tweek would help but fundamentally its the frog angle that is the issue.

Tony what gradient did you use on the entrance track? The photo I am working to shows the stone shute siding area being level with the entrance track so maybe they had to brake wagons placed there in real life?

Edited January 7, 2022 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

ps - I think the two Hornby brake composite coaches are to Diagram E140 - there is a photo of a pair in the coaches book on page 192 and as far as I can tell the window layout on the Hornby stock matches the photos. The caption notes that the pair in the photo were operated by a 45xx between Cheltenham and Kingham.

[Andy Keane]

 

On 20/04/2021 at 14:38, Mulgabill said:

Hi Andy there's some progress in this pic.

 

A few observations, if I may.

I suspect the key to this area lies in the overall radius of the curve from platform, to bridge.

The larger the radius, the more room for the shed. That's a bit counter intuitive, but it increases

the distance from behind the shed, to the point. In which you can site the shed building etc.

 

On the running lines, the 1st 2 points are better curved, rather than straight. But will certainly

be better still if custom built.

 

But another consideration may be the question of gradients.  On mine I have a slight gradient

built in towards the bridge. It is quite a characteristic, and was used for shunting coaching stock,

at busy times. But I didn't counter this with the stone siding, and so hoppers can gravitate to foul

the chute siding point!

 

And by the way, I meant to say the prairie and B set looked nice. (Are they without the extra

window found on the Airfix et al offering?

 

All the best

TONY

This is the current amount of space around the engine shed - it seems OK at present. I am now working on the booking hall and have borrowed a signal box from the web.

 

Edited April 6, 2022 by Andy Keane

[DLT]

Looking forward to seeing this develop.

Your original handbuilt trackwork looks really good, can you not use it?

Cheers, Dave.

[KeithMacdonald]

Coincidently, I was playing with the Helston layout in AnyRail. I too was getting frustrated by there not being something in between the large curved PECO points and their large straight points. Then I stumbled on the OO9BL C&L Finescale point. Would it be cheating to use one of those by the bridge?

 

[Andy Keane]

On 22/04/2021 at 20:10, DLT said:

Looking forward to seeing this develop.

Your original handbuilt trackwork looks really good, can you not use it?

Cheers, Dave.

Dave

I think I will probably use the points at the station entrance that I made and Peco for the rest. Not sure how it will line up yet.

[Andy Keane]

On 22/04/2021 at 20:57, KeithMacdonald said:

Coincidently, I was playing with the Helston layout in AnyRail. I too was getting frustrated by there not being something in between the large curved PECO points and their large straight points. Then I stumbled on the OO9BL C&L Finescale point. Would it be cheating to use one of those by the bridge?

 

Keith, I have not tried those but at a glance they don't seem to offer a curved point which is what one really needs. Though they seem to be kits so I guess one could try and build a curved point with one of their kits? The trouble with my hand built track is 1) there are no chairs on the sleepers, just solder and 2) its hard to make the point change mechanism as reliable as the mass produced points. The finescale stuff comes with the chairs and I would guess their mechanisms are quite good - so maybe worth a try.

Edited April 27, 2021 by Andy Keane

[Andy Keane]

18 minutes ago, Andy Keane said:

ps - might you share your .any file with us?

 

[KeithMacdonald]

@Andy Keane - I've just remembered another source of ready-made OO-gauge points with a large radius. Shinohara isn't a well-known brand, but a few places still have stock.

e.g.

Quote

 

Shinohara HO/OO Code 100 No 6 Turnout

Radius 109cm/43" : Length 30.0cm 12" ; Frog 9.30 degrees.

 

 

https://www.scalelink.co.uk/acatalog/Shinohara_Track___Pointwork__HO____Aiguillages.html

 

[Andy Keane]

On 22/04/2021 at 20:57, KeithMacdonald said:

Coincidently, I was playing with the Helston layout in AnyRail. I too was getting frustrated by there not being something in between the large curved PECO points and their large straight points. Then I stumbled on the OO9BL C&L Finescale point. Would it be cheating to use one of those by the bridge?

 

Keith

Now I come to play with your layout I notice this is a third track plan, being different from the original when the line opened and also from the one in the photo above that I am working to. Do you know when the station was laid out as per your plan?

regards

Andy

[Andy Keane]

19 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

@Andy Keane - I've just remembered another source of ready-made OO-gauge points with a large radius. Shinohara isn't a well-known brand, but a few places still have stock.

e.g.

 

https://www.scalelink.co.uk/acatalog/Shinohara_Track___Pointwork__HO____Aiguillages.html

 

I see they do a code 8 as well that is even finer! But being to HO scaledo you have a view on what the sleepers look like compare to OO track?

[Andy Keane]

29 minutes ago, Andy Keane said:

Keith

Now I come to play with your layout I notice this is a third track plan, being different from the original when the line opened and also from the one in the photo above that I am working to. Do you know when the station was laid out as per your plan?

regards

Andy

ps - how did you get the OS map into anyrail? Its not obvious to me but I am a bit of a binner with it.

[Mulgabill]

1 hour ago, Andy Keane said:

Keith

Now I come to play with your layout I notice this is a third track plan, being different from the original when the line opened and also from the one in the photo above that I am working to. Do you know when the station was laid out as per your plan?

regards

Andy

 

I'm not convinced this is a correct version of the Helston layouts. It seems to have an

extra pair of points, forming a cross between the 2 actual versions.

 

TONY

[KeithMacdonald]

3 hours ago, Andy Keane said:

Keith

Now I come to play with your layout I notice this is a third track plan, being different from the original when the line opened and also from the one in the photo above that I am working to. Do you know when the station was laid out as per your plan?

regards

Andy

 

Hi Andy

 

Here's the source reference

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18&lat=50.10680&lon=-5.26997&layers=168&b=1&marker=50.186430,-5.418167

 

The map legend says:

Quote

Cornwall LXXVI.6, Revised: 1906, Published: 1908

 

So laid-out sometime before that? And, yes, there may well be a later layout that you might prefer.

 

 

[Andy Keane]

I think the map you are referring to is the one in your anyrail plan and I think that shows the engine shed only connected via a cross-over and not a point on the main running line as per the first track plan. I have that map as well in digital form and use it in my CAD model. How do you get it into anyrail?

[KeithMacdonald]

2 hours ago, Mulgabill said:

I'm not convinced this is a correct version of the Helston layouts. It seems to have an extra pair of points, forming a cross between the 2 actual versions.

TONY

 

Hi Tony

 

You're correct to question it :-)

My track-laying in AnyRail might have obscured the detail in the map underneath, and I might have unwittingly "optimised" (or fudged) it to suit the Hornby OO track I'd used in the first version in AnyRail. Here's the map with no track:

 

 

And here's a new version that you might prefer, using mostly Peco points, but a couple more Shinohara as well, and more flextrack.

 

 

Hope that helps.

 

@Andy Keane - I'll email you the new version.

 

[KeithMacdonald]

21 minutes ago, Andy Keane said:

I have that map as well in digital form and use it in my CAD model. How do you get it into anyrail?

 

It took me a bit of trawling the AnyRail forum to find how it's done.

 

Step 1:

Open AnyRail for a new file, so you have a blank canvas.

 

Step 2:

On the Insert tab, click Add rectangle...

 

 

... then click somewhere on the blank canvas and a grey rectangle/square should appear.

 

 

Step 3:

(This is the tricky bit)

if you click on the main body of the grey rectangle/square, nothing happens. But if you click on the border of it, the border turns green and a grab handle appears (which can be used to rotate it).

 

 

Also: the Tab bar switches to the Tools/Surfaces tab with more controls available.

 

 

See the "Load Image" button, furthest right? Click on that.

 

Step 4

A File Dialog window should appear, so you can choose whatever image you would like to use as a background.

e.g.

 

Choose {whatever} and Open

 

Step 5

You should now be back on the main canvas, with a thumbnail-sized image inside the grey square.

 

 

Which is a bit of an anti-climax, until you click on the border of the square (again), then look at the toolbar again.

 

 

Make sure the [X] Maintain aspect ratio is checked, then change the width to something more suitable like 600, then click Adjust Outline.

The image will magically get much bigger. :-)

 

As for making the image the correct size, by trial and error I've found I get best results by

(a) including the map distance ruler (zoomed to 50 metres),

(b) placing it on a grid of 65cm,

(c) iteratively adjusting the width and clicking "Adjust outline" until the 50m ruler matches the grid width

 

That seems to give me an "OO sized map" that's just about right. Others might have a better / quicker method which I'd gladly learn.

 

 

Hope that helps?