7mm Lynton & Barnstaple Railway Project; Currently Paused

[Siberian Snooper]

You should be ok with anything above 60mm deep, we use to use 3" ally angle at 6 ft centres to support deck plates and you could have half a dozen people stood on the plates.

[Indomitable026]

You should be ok with anything above 60mm deep, we use to use 3" ally angle at 6 ft centres to support deck plates and you could have half a dozen people stood on the plates.

Is that half a dozen 'railway modellers' or normals..?

[Siberian Snooper]

Is that half a dozen 'railway modellers' or normals..?

Dockyard matey's or matlots, definitely not normals.

 

Edit for predictive text.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Siberian Snooper

[Indomitable026]

Dockyard matey's or matlots, definitely not normals.

 

Edit for predictive text.

Ok, sounds equivalent to the 'railway bellies' over here.

 

All good..

[Mark Forrest]

As my first contribution to this project, I offered to take the plan which Chris had drawn and work out what size of turnouts were required.  First things first, I needed to enter the track gauge details as a custom gauge in Templot, then set the rails to show flat bottom and the sleeper length to 4'6" to represent the standard gauge sleepers cut in half used on the line.

With this done, I then imported the drawing which Chris had done as a background image and began overlaying this with track templates.  

Initially I used 1:7 turnouts on the mainline and 1:6.5 in the yard, the result looked like this:

 

At Damian's request, I've changed this to use 1:8 turnouts throughout:

 

The biggest difference this makes is in the distance between the two turnouts in the yard, which move closer together when using 1:8s:

 

 

[wagonbasher]

The Thomas layout you refer to was held firm with the 1/2 inch of plaster you lamped on it.

 

Stafford's heaviest board ever, before or after....

 

I can remember Damian and myself carrying that board up the narrow steep stairs and a 90 degrees bend at the top to a children's nursery ( we leant it to them for a week), there was about 2 inches spare and our knuckles filled most of that space.

 

Andy 

[2ManySpams]

The Thomas layout you refer to was held firm with the 1/2 inch of plaster you lamped on it.

 

Stafford's heaviest board ever, before or after....

 

I can remember Damian and myself carrying that board up the narrow steep stairs and a 90 degrees bend at the top to a children's nursery ( we leant it to them for a week), there was about 2 inches spare and our knuckles filled most of that space.

 

Andy

 

Lesser boards would have given in by now...

[DLT]

As my first contribution to this project, I offered to take the plan which Chris had drawn and work out what size of turnouts were required.  First things first, I needed to enter the track gauge details as a custom gauge in Templot, then set the rails to show flat bottom and the sleeper length to 4'6" to represent the standard gauge sleepers cut in half used on the line.

With this done, I then imported the drawing which Chris had done as a background image and began overlaying this with track templates.  

Initially I used 1:7 turnouts on the mainline and 1:6.5 in the yard, the result looked like this:

BF2.JPG

 

At Damian's request, I've changed this to use 1:8 turnouts throughout:

BF all #8s.JPG

 

The biggest difference this makes is in the distance between the two turnouts in the yard, which move closer together when using 1:8s:

yard close up 6_5s.JPG

 

yard close up 8s.JPG

Hi Damian,

I think you've got the points in the yard the wrong way round.  As far as I can see the short siding should turnout from the long siding, so that point should be lefthand, not righthand.  Also its position is better in the first diagram, as the siding has to cross the down platform and pass through a gate before reaching the turnout.  (There's a catchpoint just after the gate as well, but you may want to disregard that).  This arrangement changed over time, the fence and gate disappeared and the catchpoint moved closer to the mainline.

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Dave.

[Mark Forrest]

I'd noted that there should be a trap point coming out of the yard, I'd left it off the plan until the sizes of the other turnouts is finalised.

Using a left on the sidings brings the track much closer to the front of the board, although it should be possible.

[Stubby47]

Right then, I've done a bit of scribble this morning to show my current thoughts on transit boxes and their use as legs for the layout;transit boxes.jpgNotes;3 Boards per boxBoard height at least 12""I" section height adjustable to compensate for floor discrepanciesUse of aluminium box section for longitudinal beams (9 feet - check trailer)Depending on strength of aluminium intermediate supports may be requiredWheels on boxes need brakesBoards removed from ends of boxes

How big will each of the boards be, and will there be room for three transit boxes in the trailer ?

[Indomitable026]

How big will each of the boards be, and will there be room for three transit boxes in the trailer ?

Yes and yes, but no room for caravans.

[2ManySpams]

Hi Damian,

I think you've got the points in the yard the wrong way round. As far as I can see the short siding should turnout from the long siding, so that point should be lefthand, not righthand. Also its position is better in the first diagram, as the siding has to cross the down platform and pass through a gate before reaching the turnout. (There's a catchpoint just after the gate as well, but you may want to disregard that). This arrangement changed over time, the fence and gate disappeared and the catchpoint moved closer to the mainline.

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Dave.

Dave,

 

Are you sure the point is the wrong way around?

 

 

I did originally draw it as you suggested out of habit but then noted the drawing above showed it the 'wrong' way around.

[Indomitable026]

Dave,

 

Are you sure the point is the wrong way around?

 

rps20151002_075716.jpg

 

I did originally draw it as you suggested out of habit but then noted the drawing above showed it the 'wrong' way around.

Hmmm, I see your point Chris.

 

Perhaps we need to build the goods store that was proposed but never built, for added interest?

[DLT]

Aha, very interesting.  Is that from Measured and Drawn?  (I must put it on my Christmas list...)  That looks like large-scale OS mapping, but what is the date?  It must be fairly early as it show all the fencing which was gone by the 1920s.

I was looking at the official pre-opening photograph of BF, that just shows the toe of the point and my interpretation could easily be wrong.  

I guess we don't know the date that the second siding was removed, it could have been well before the removal of the loop (which according to the book was 1932, long after the SR track renewal)

Cheers, Dave.

[2ManySpams]

Yes, from measured and drawn - expensive but a fantastic reference.

 

Notes say the gate across the siding was removed before 1908. The plan is based on 1904 OS 1:2500 map, LSWR 1922 survey and RAF aerial photos. Siding and loop removed by May 1932.

[Indomitable026]

Right then,

 

Following various discussionson on and off the web, the current thinking for the baseboard design has arrived at the following;

 

 

Notes,

•All joints will have hardwood blocks, glued and screwed

•3/8s (9mm) good quality ply

•The top of these boards will form the base level of the scenery

•Plywood up-stands will support the higher trackbed

•Trackbed will have lateral supports to alleviate warping

[Stubby47]

Are the boards connected end to end or side to side ?

 

If you add lateral support under the track bed, will that hamper adding electrical stuff  (wires, point motors) ?

 

Will the connecting board sides/ends have profile boards to match the scenery ? If so, will these fit inside, outside or on top of the frame edge board ?

 

Will having diagonal bracing struts add extra complexity when adding risers for the track bed ?

[Indomitable026]

 

Are the boards connected end to end or side to side ?

 

If you add lateral support under the track bed, will that hamper adding electrical stuff  (wires, point motors) ?

 

Will the connecting board sides/ends have profile boards to match the scenery ? If so, will these fit inside, outside or on top of the frame edge board ?

 

Will having diagonal bracing struts add extra complexity when adding risers for the track bed ?

So many questions Stubzie,

 

Boards are connected side to side i.e. down the long edge.

 

The lateral supports will be positioned to avoid electrics/ motors etc. The advantage of working to a plan on Templot or other, allows you to avoid this - famous last words!

 

Finished profile boards will fit to the outside - the scnenery goes on first and then the boards are cut to profile.

 

I dont think the diagonal bracing adds complication to the upstands, watch this space!

[Mark Forrest]

This sounds like just the reminder I need to have another look at the Templot plan. I was going to have a look if it was possible to move things around a bit and get the approach to the sidings further along the platforms.

 

We noted, when looking at some photos over a beer last weekend that there is only a short length of platform (possibly no longer than a loco) between the turnout and the signal; which seems odd, why have a platform there if it is only going to be alongside a loco?

[Indomitable026]

This sounds like just the reminder I need to have another look at the Templot plan. I was going to have a look if it was possible to move things around a bit and get the approach to the sidings further along the platforms.

 

We noted, when looking at some photos over a beer last weekend that there is only a short length of platform (possibly no longer than a loco) between the turnout and the signal; which seems odd, why have a platform there if it is only going to be alongside a loco?

 

Yes please.

 

I've found some typical L&B track panel drawings i'll send you them.

 

I may also have a go at building some track at the weekend, i've got some wooden sleepers - albeit with holes punched in them, yes you guessed it, for 7mm Standard gauge. Anyway it will be good as a test... 

[Indomitable026]

Right then, I'm all fired up after our success at Wigan. Today I'm going to have a go at trial piece of trackwork.

 

I've got some 7mm plain line plywood sleepers.

 

 

On the real thing they used full size sleepers cut in half, this looks like its going to work here.

 

 

Yes I guess you spotted the deliberate mistake already - its only a trial...

[hayfield]

Get the saw out

[Mark Forrest]

I noticed the other day that C&L do some nice laser cut 7mm sleepers which aren't punched for rivets. Nice thick ones in 3mm ply.

[Stubby47]

Why not trim 1/4 off each side, leaving the hole in the middle.

If you then stuck the off cuts together you'd have more sleepers.

[Indomitable026]

So mark up, cut and sand. Keeping them in a bunch hopefully keeps them square...