Jump to content
 

OHLE


Recommended Posts

Sirs.  Having trawled the web for what seems likes weeks without avail, can anyone point me at a good guide to modelling OHLE covering such topics as tensioning, turnouts, crossovers, slips etc etc.  As an up til now steam man I have had no exposure to the finer points of this topic and am hence a total novice in this area.  Help would be much appreciated

 

avondata

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Certainly there are some very good threads with diagrams of typical British equipment.  I'm daft enough to be modelling 1907 British OHE and am having to create it all from scratch.  However I may be able to give you a few pointers.

 

1)  You need to decide which tracks need to be wired.

2) After that you need to carefully plan your mast positions.  I did this in Templot and also used prototype plans.  I then drew lines on Templot that kept the contact wires over the tracks and within the pantograph tracking range.  This means that on curves your masts are much close together than on the prototype. 

3.  Then you need to plan your wire runs.  Thus needs to take into account where each run starts and finishes.  Again prototype photos will give you a lot of  information.    My complex area is a single slip as part of a crossover and junction in the station throat.  2 wire runs come in from the east on the Up and Down Main and three come in from the west on the Up and Down Main and the Castle Branch.    What happens is that the Up Main from the west terminates beyond the crossover and the Up Main from the east goes over the crossing and then becomes the down main to the west.  The Branch line wire comes over the slip and then becomes the down main wire running east.   Where the wires come close there are little hoops that keep the contact wires the correct distance apart.  

I hope this is of use.  The style and detail of the fittings will have changed over the years but the basic principles haven't changed.

 

post-6824-0-94503000-1439642533_thumb.jpg

This photo shows the east end of the station and the way the wiring was done for the bay platform that ran off the Up Main.

post-6824-0-16792000-1439642535_thumb.jpg

This shows the wiring over the single slip mentioned above.

 

If you look on my layout thread that's in my signature, (Lancaster Green Ayre) you'll see some photos of the slip area ohle in the last couple of days.

 

 

Jamie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Certainly there are some very good threads with diagrams of typical British equipment.  I'm daft enough to be modelling 1907 British OHE and am having to create it all from scratch.  However I may be able to give you a few pointers.

 

1)  You need to decide which tracks need to be wired.

2) After that you need to carefully plan your mast positions.  I did this in Templot and also used prototype plans.  I then drew lines on Templot that kept the contact wires over the tracks and within the pantograph tracking range.  This means that on curves your masts are much close together than on the prototype. 

3.  Then you need to plan your wire runs.  Thus needs to take into account where each run starts and finishes.  Again prototype photos will give you a lot of  information.    My complex area is a single slip as part of a crossover and junction in the station throat.  2 wire runs come in from the east on the Up and Down Main and three come in from the west on the Up and Down Main and the Castle Branch.    What happens is that the Up Main from the west terminates beyond the crossover and the Up Main from the east goes over the crossing and then becomes the down main to the west.  The Branch line wire comes over the slip and then becomes the down main wire running east.   Where the wires come close there are little hoops that keep the contact wires the correct distance apart.  

I hope this is of use.  The style and detail of the fittings will have changed over the years but the basic principles haven't changed.

 

attachicon.gifReduced Overhead 1.jpg

This photo shows the east end of the station and the way the wiring was done for the bay platform that ran off the Up Main.

attachicon.gifReduced overhead 2.jpg

This shows the wiring over the single slip mentioned above.

 

If you look on my layout thread that's in my signature, (Lancaster Green Ayre) you'll see some photos of the slip area ohle in the last couple of days.

 

 

Jamie

 

I think that is the best, most concise explanation I have ever seen of how to string up the wires above a crossover.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Sirs.  Having trawled the web for what seems likes weeks without avail, can anyone point me at a good guide to modelling OHLE covering such topics as tensioning, turnouts, crossovers, slips etc etc.  As an up til now steam man I have had no exposure to the finer points of this topic and am hence a total novice in this area.  Help would be much appreciated

 

avondata

Hi avondata

 

I have started a serise of threads about OLE

 

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71391-british-railways-ole-part-one-plain-track/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71591-british-railways-ole-part-two-curved-track/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/80364-british-railways-ole-part-three-anchor-points/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/80403-british-railways-ole-part-four-overlap/

 

Time and motivation for me to continue has been a problem, sorry. I do have information on OLE and point work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before discussing what Mark of OLE is required for what line, it is a good start to decide how prototypical OHLE you want, ie:

 

  1. The basic coarse scale Lima and Hornby OLE of the early 1980s which clipped to the track & worked.
  2. An ‘intermediate’ version used by many layouts & myself where it is just a representation of OLE & looks convincing from normal exhibition viewing distance.
  3. The prototypical OLE with all the tensioners, super detailed arms, etc. like the realistic super detailed OLE on Birmingham New Street & Clive Mortimore’s thread (Comment No. 6).

 

The OLE on my 00 gauge layout ‘Crewlisle’ is made up from modified JV masts and portal frames, originally available through Hadley Hobbies in the 1980s/90s, but the catenary wires are scratch built.   I chose JV because their single masts required no modifications & it was easy to modify their continental style portal frames with their extended side masts to look like the early WCML multi track spans still around Birmingham & Crewe.  The article for constructing my style of OLE appeared in February 2014 Model Rail magazine.   My original magazine article had to be edited for space reasons.  The missing important paragraphs are in  ‘Crewlisle Catenary in Model Rail 192 February 2014’ Comment on page 3 of the RMWeb Model Rail forum.

 

I had originally thought that the JV OLE was no longer available but have since found out that it is available from Marno Ltd in London, e-mail address marnoltd@aol.com .  When viewed from approximately 1M, it is very convincing and blends in well with the general railway scene.  The pantograph is actually in contact with the contact wire to give the normal up and down movement when entering tunnels or bridges.   Both masts & catenary wires are all portable and locos can be run at scale speeds of 100mph.  Being portable is ideal for layouts that have to be assembled/dismantled for exhibitions (like mine) and for good access to the track for cleaning or repairs without fear of it being damaged.  Even if modellers don't want to use the JV system and choose for example Sommerfeldt or Viessmann, I give details in the article of how to measure and position masts, make the scratch built catenary wires, how the wires are run in tunnels to prevent the pantograph snagging any wires/fittings on the underside of minimum height tunnels/high level baseboards & what to do at baseboard joints in tunnels.  The catenary wires are made from high tensile steel wire (piano wire) so that if a pantograph snags the wires at high speed, they do not ‘kink’.

 

Modifications to any other system or even scratch building from brass or plastic sections would be similar to the ones I have done on the JV masts and frames.  Remember that any manufacturer’s BR style masts can be used but the catenary wire is unique to each layout due to track formation and radius of curves.  Having said that, perhaps the Dapol plastic masts would be too flexible to use with my steel catenary wires with the pantograph in contact with the wire.  You can make OLE as simple or detailed as you want.

 

Crewlisle will be appearing at the NEC this year so if you are going & want further information, I will be pleased to help you.

 

Peter

 

post-11593-0-49071800-1439747459.jpgpost-11593-0-38529000-1439747445.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I forgot to mention was which pantographs I use.

 

1.  Hornby 86/1 & 86/2 – When I first did my OLE about 30 years ago there was not a 4mm scale pantograph in the Sommerfeldt range, only HO scale which looked ridiculously under scale on the 86s, so I had to remove the Hornby monstrosities & scratchbuilt the two pantographs I required.  Since then, they have introduced 4mm scale pantographs which I have now fitted & they look great.  A bit fiddly as I had to carefully modify the original roof pantograph support framework to accept the Sommerfeldt ones.

 

2.  Lima 87 – Original as bought.  I was not aware it was not a proper cross arm pantograph as fitted to the Class 87s until reading it in a modelling magazine.  How many of you know the difference?

 

3.  Hornby APT – Removed Hornby monstrosity & fitted a suitable Sommerfeldt one.

 

4.  DC Kits Class 81 – Modified Class 86 chassis & twin Sommerfeldt pantographs.

 

5.  Bachmann Class 85 – As bought.  Perfect!

Link to post
Share on other sites

2.  Lima 87 – Original as bought.  I was not aware it was not a proper cross arm pantograph as fitted to the Class 87s until reading it in a modelling magazine.  How many of you know the difference?

  

 

Almost everyone who has ever looked at them with any degree of interest.

Certainly everyone in my circle of colleagues is well aware of the difference, especially as it was clearly necessary to scratchbuild if you wanted to fit them.

Which magazine did you see this in? Possibly 'Model Railways' from Feb 1984? That is when my article on their construction was published.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost everyone who has ever looked at them with any degree of interest.

Certainly everyone in my circle of colleagues is well aware of the difference, especially as it was clearly necessary to scratchbuild if you wanted to fit them.

Which magazine did you see this in? Possibly 'Model Railways' from Feb 1984? That is when my article on their construction was published.

 

The only modelling magazine I have taken is Railway Modeller & from about 2002 Model Rail.  Bearing in mind that 75% of exhibition visitors are either average modellers (like myself) or families having a day out, in my 30 years of exhibiting from local venues to the Hornby Great Electric Train Show, NEC & Ally Pally no one has asked me from the normal viewing distance if it is a prototypical cross arm pantograph or the original Lima one.  It works fine & looks good.  Whilst I have much admiration for modellers that have the skill to strive for perfection, I have better things to do with my modelling time & improve my layout than change a Class 87 pantograph.  When you have a layout like mine that runs a minimum of two & sometimes as many as four trains simultaneously there is more than enough to entertain exhibition visitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 no one has asked me from the normal viewing distance if it is a prototypical cross arm pantograph or the original Lima one. 

 

Maybe that's because those that are not aware that there is difference have no reason to ask, and those that do know the difference can clearly see it so there is no need to ask...

 

It does work well though and because of that changing it is very low down on my long 'to do' list...

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I forgot to mention was which pantographs I use.

 

1.  Hornby 86/1 & 86/2 – When I first did my OLE about 30 years ago there was not a 4mm scale pantograph in the Sommerfeldt range, only HO scale which looked ridiculously under scale on the 86s, so I had to remove the Hornby monstrosities & scratchbuilt the two pantographs I required.  Since then, they have introduced 4mm scale pantographs which I have now fitted & they look great.  A bit fiddly as I had to carefully modify the original roof pantograph support framework to accept the Sommerfeldt ones.

 

2.  Lima 87 – Original as bought.  I was not aware it was not a proper cross arm pantograph as fitted to the Class 87s until reading it in a modelling magazine.  How many of you know the difference?

 

3.  Hornby APT – Removed Hornby monstrosity & fitted a suitable Sommerfeldt one.

 

4.  DC Kits Class 81 – Modified Class 86 chassis & twin Sommerfeldt pantographs.

 

5.  Bachmann Class 85 – As bought.  Perfect!

Can I ask what Sommerfeldt pantographs you used? I need something for my Heljan 86.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only modelling magazine I have taken is Railway Modeller & from about 2002 Model Rail.  Bearing in mind that 75% of exhibition visitors are either average modellers (like myself) or families having a day out, in my 30 years of exhibiting from local venues to the Hornby Great Electric Train Show, NEC & Ally Pally no one has asked me from the normal viewing distance if it is a prototypical cross arm pantograph or the original Lima one.  It works fine & looks good.  Whilst I have much admiration for modellers that have the skill to strive for perfection, I have better things to do with my modelling time & improve my layout than change a Class 87 pantograph.  When you have a layout like mine that runs a minimum of two & sometimes as many as four trains simultaneously there is more than enough to entertain exhibition visitors.

 

No-one would ever need to ask if it is prototypical, because it clearly isn't. Anyone clued up enough to even think of asking wouldn't need to bother.

It most certainly doesn't look good on an 87.

My colleagues and I exhibited a layout like yours for many years, with working OHLE, Cross-Arm and Brecknell Willis pans, so the difficulties and time involved are well understood. Out of the box Lima pans (of any kind) were simply unacceptable to us.

Now that Judith Edge Kits have brought out an etched kit for the cross-arm there would be even less excuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I forgot to mention was which pantographs I use.

 

1.  Hornby 86/1 & 86/2 – When I first did my OLE about 30 years ago there was not a 4mm scale pantograph in the Sommerfeldt range, only HO scale which looked ridiculously under scale on the 86s, so I had to remove the Hornby monstrosities & scratchbuilt the two pantographs I required.  Since then, they have introduced 4mm scale pantographs which I have now fitted & they look great.  A bit fiddly as I had to carefully modify the original roof pantograph support framework to accept the Sommerfeldt ones.

 

Yes, the Sommerfeldt pantograph is 968.  There are no fitting instructions, but what you must not do is secure it hard down on the roof of your 86 with the supplied nut & bolt because the pantograph spring protrudes below the underside of the pantograph base.  I fitted three thin 6 BA bass washers under the base before securing it to the roof.  Pantograph now works as it should!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny how someone has mentioned JV catenary.I bought a trial pack from Hadley Hobbies in the 1980s.Itwas & still is the only UK looking system available & it`s nice to know that it`s still available,i found it in my cupboard the other day.As a trial,at the time,i was was running a Hornby Dublo 3 rail layout & my wife bought me for one Christmas,a Lima Cl.87 converted for 3 rail using a Marklin skate,i recall it came from a model shop in Lincoln Rd.Peterborough.I assembled a stretch of JV cantenary & found that the Cl.87 ran well under it,it could have been a way of using 2 trains on the same track a la Trix Twin.Unfortunatly it never got past the trial stage as a house move & change of scale to N caused it all to be packed away.I still have it though packed away with the HD collection.

 

     Happy days!.

                Ray.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...