Castle Aching

[corneliuslundie]

You are not alone. Track building holds no fears for me but I have had all the components for a GWR 1196 loco,for two years, but have yet to summon up the courage to start it - low melting point soldering and compensation being the two things which frighten me. So I end up with more and more wagons, kit and scratch built - in fact so many that I have just had a clear out and declared 15 surplus to requirements as no longer relevant to my modelling interests.

But this month I must make a start on that loco. I must. I must. I must.

Jonathan

[Nearholmer]

We're all as bad as one another on this score.

 

I could list: unfinished coaches and vans in 15mm/ft; the un-started 1/32 fishing boat kit; two locos that need body-mounting bracket adjustments; a loco that needs to have the mechanism stripped, degreased and reassembled; trivial wiring jobs on the layout that forever get postponed; finishing the fitting of turntable locking catches etc etc.

 

"Lack of time" is my standard excuse, and often a real reason, but each job contains a small hillock that needs to be surmounted, and I suspect that 'on the couch' that would eventually prove to be the real reason for inaction, in every case.

Edited October 13, 2017 by Nearholmer

[Northroader]

That ain’t much, earlier in the year I thought of 154 distinct jobs to finish, a few weeks later I had knocked off a couple and added another half dozen, and the list just keeps on growing.

[nick_bastable]

That ain’t much, earlier in the year I thought of 154 distinct jobs to finish, a few weeks later I had knocked off a couple and added another half dozen, and the list just keeps on growing.

the answer is do not make lists  

 

Nick

[Regularity]

I found the idea of ballasting before laying the rails particularly interesting. 

I did, too.

Once.

Never again.

Never.

Works for some, but not for me.

Lay sleepers/timbers.

Lightly sand the tops: http://themodelrailwayshow.com/cn1950s/?p=1141 but Trevor Marshall is still working through the backlog of lost image links thanks to Photobucket’s faux pas.

Lay rails.

Wire up.

Install turnout operating systems.

Test, test, fettle, test, fettle, test.

Do something else on the layout, especially any buildings (platforms, goods and engine sheds, etc) which encroach into the ballast area proper (anything which borders the cess is fine).

Install (dummy, unless you are really skilled - or deluded!) point ridding, or at least the stools.

Test. (Ok, play!)

Paint rails, sleepers, etc.

Clean rail heads and inside top edge.

Test.

Install ground signals, and any signals in ballasted areas.

Test for clearances.

 

Do anything else on the layout: it really doesn’t matter, except, add the cess after the trackside scenics are more or less done.

 

Did I say I would not glue ballast and sleepers at the same time ever again?

 

It’s a lot easier to make adjustments to everything if there is no ballast. Also, I like to mark out rail positions, platform edge lines, notes about wiring and buildings etc, on the baseboard top, and putting ballast down early hides it all. Plus, I got some bits of ballast under sleepers, which is a real PITA to correct if the glue has dried.

[Caley Jim]

the answer is do not make lists

One of life's eternal mysteries for me is why Santa never has any round tuits for me,despite my asking him every year for some.

 

Jim

Edited October 13, 2017 by Caley Jim

[nick_bastable]

One of life's eternal mysteries for me is why Santa never has any round tuits for me,despite my asking him every year for some.

 

Jim

I had to google this all i can say is 

 

Nick

[Hroth]

One of life's eternal mysteries for me is why Santa never has any round tuits for me,despite my asking him every year for some.

 

Jim

I'd ask, when I can get a round tuit........

[runs as required]

the answer is do not make lists  

 Nick

A better answer is to make a list of all the things you actually HAVE done (including the none modelling tasks) in the past week.

The 'roond twits' recede grumpily into the shadows as you smile and reach for 'my content' on RMweb :-)

dh

(overlooking Grand Harbour, Malta)

[Nearholmer]

In one of the ancient books that I've got, someone made their track by laying fine grit sandpaper, sleepers from black cartridge paper glued on, then brass pins driven in, rails soldered thereto.

 

Apart from a minor fire risk during soldering, it actually looks like a pretty smart method.

[Caley Jim]

I had to google this all i can say is

 

I once saw round tuits for sale in a shop in Moffat. My mistake was in not buying any!

 

If I was overlooking the Grand Harbour I'd get nothing done!

 

Jim

[Guy Rixon]

We're all as bad as one another on this score.

 

I could list: unfinished coaches and vans in 15mm/ft; the un-started 1/32 fishing boat kit; two locos that need body-mounting bracket adjustments; a loco that needs to have the mechanism stripped, degreased and reassembled; trivial wiring jobs on the layout that forever get postponed; finishing the fitting of turntable locking catches etc etc.

 

"Lack of time" is my standard excuse, and often a real reason, but each job contains a small hillock that needs to be surmounted, and I suspect that 'on the couch' that would eventually prove to be the real reason for inaction, in every case.

 

 

Quite. I work to the point where the build gets difficult, and success is uncertain, and then it's not so much fun, and I stop. If a kit has just one bit that doesn't fit then the experience is ... disappointing.

 

Add to that the disabling fear that the whole model will be FUBAR'd if the difficult bit is done wrongly. It's a consequence of the design pattern where everything is attached permanently to a single assembly. The software industry has names for this; the printable one is "big ball of mud". This is where I miss plastic kits a la Coopercraft: cheap enough to write off and easy to replace, back in the day. 

[Regularity]

In one of the ancient books that I've got, someone made their track by laying fine grit sandpaper, sleepers from black cartridge paper glued on, then brass pins driven in, rails soldered thereto.

Apart from a minor fire risk during soldering, it actually looks like a pretty smart method.

See this, two weeks ago:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107713-castle-aching/page-221&do=findComment&comment=2872804

[Nearholmer]

Ah ..... sorry.

[Hroth]

Ah ..... sorry.

I quoted verbatim from the article, and your source sounds sufficiently different enough to be an alternative, so no problems!

 

One assumes the brass pins would be the flat headed variety, things would be more interesting with the pointy-headed ones....

[Edwardian]

Midland & Great Northern track & ballast survey, anyone?

 

This here is Cromer Beach:

 

Circa 1902;

 

Sometime 1906 to circa 1912 (because there is a Midland tank in it); and,

 

1914 (looking the other way).

 

The photographs tend to support my working theory that the more 'modern' practice of ballasting only up to sleeper height is often more characteristic of the 1910s than the 1900s.

 

In the c. 1902 picture, I think we are seeing ballast dressed over the sleeper tops, but worn thin in places. The sleepers are mostly discernable, some quite exposed, whereas, by 1914,the practice of laying over the sleepers has clearly been abandoned and a more modern appearance results.

 

 

 

  

[Regularity]

The top “dressing” was probably not ballast, per se, but a thin layer of much finer stones or even shingle to protect the wood. I think this has been covered already, but it is worth reiterating as modelling it may turn out to be simple.

 

Ballast “normally” to the sleeper tops, but don’t worry particularly about the size/colour of the stones: any cheap, fairly coarse ballast will do. When this is nicely set, and all the detail painting, etc, is done, apply the top coat using something carefully selected for size, shape and colour. Could be fine granite, aquarium sand, or cinders/ash. Worth splashing out on the best materials for this!

[Compound2632]

Midland & Great Northern track & ballast survey, anyone?

 

This here is Cromer Beach:

 

Circa 1902;

 

Sometime 1906 to circa 1912 (because there is a Midland tank in it); and,

 

1914 (looking the other way).

 

The photographs tend to support my working theory that the more 'modern' practice of ballasting only up to sleeper height is often more characteristic of the 1910s than the 1900s.

 

In the c. 1902 picture, I think we are seeing ballast dressed over the sleeper tops, but worn thin in places. The sleepers are mostly discernable, some quite exposed, whereas, by 1914,the practice of laying over the sleepers has clearly been abandoned and a more modern appearance results.

 

Oh Oh Oh carriages!

 

Centre picture, Midland clerestories: leading, a 48' square light lavatory brake composite to D508. The second and third carriages are a bit indistinct but I think the second might be a 54' square light corridor brake composite to D470 and the third probably a 54' round-panelled corridor carriage; from the rearward position of the guard's lookout (bespeaking a short brake compartment), probably also a brake composite to D559.

 

That's a very characteristic short Midland train - all three brake composites could be for different destinations, or at least two for one and one for another - or the non-corridor carriage a strengthener. I haven't got a copy of a carriage marshalling document for this period that covers these workings (my interests being more westerly) but I'll have a look in the Midland Railway Study Centre catalogue.

 

I'm pretty ignorant on Great Northern matters but I guess that in the top picture those are mostly 6-wheeled GNR carriages transferred to the Joint whereas the big clerestory and elliptical roof bogies in the bottom picture have worked through from Kings Cross?

 

Is that cattle wagon a GN design or a Melton Constable original?

Edited October 14, 2017 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

The top “dressing” was probably not ballast, per se, but a thin layer of much finer stones or even shingle to protect the wood. I think this has been covered already, but it is worth reiterating as modelling it may turn out to be simple.

 

Ballast “normally” to the sleeper tops, but don’t worry particularly about the size/colour of the stones: any cheap, fairly coarse ballast will do. When this is nicely set, and all the detail painting, etc, is done, apply the top coat using something carefully selected for size, shape and colour. Could be fine granite, aquarium sand, or cinders/ash. Worth splashing out on the best materials for this!

 

Thanks, yes, this is also my understanding: The running lines/platform roads will have stone ballast, but with a top dressing of finer material.

 

Though jumping ahead, I anticipate using a crushed nut shell from Greenscenes to represent the ballast.

 

The finer top dressing could be wood ash, or, I am thinking, Chinchilla dust (though I still say it's cruel to grind them up so).  

 

A few other M&GN stations below.

 

The Johnson 4-4-0 is at Gedney in 1909. Note she is in original condition (save for lamp brackets), as she retains the original slim boiler, but has not had the characteristic extended smoke-box that the MGN gradually fitted to many of the class.

 

The first 3 coaches are 6-wheelers of Midland heritage.  Most likely they were some of the stock that the MR and the GN donated to the Joint in 1903. It is said that these coaches retained their original liveries, but re-lettered for the MGN, so we have some Midland lake behind an ochre locomotive of Midland design.

 

The signal is, of course, a GN somersault type, and Compound will be pleased to note further evidence in support of his theory that every pre-Grouping goods yard must feature at least one MR D299 5-plank (I assume it's a D299).

 

The picture featuring the Beyer Peacock 4-4-0 is at Holt, and should date from before the locomotive was re-boilered in 1908. Mostly GN stock.

 

We also have South Lynn (pre-1901), the bucolic Hemsby, c.1900, an undated view of Raynham Park, and a nice view of Sheringham, showing the box and platform shelter, which was probably snapped by the Midland's photographer in 1894, and otherwise dates from before the track was renewed using bullhead rail in 1902.

 

Finally, a view of Sutton Bridge. It is a postcard view, but I don't know the date. Note the use of a continuous check rail due to the tightness of the curve through the station.

Edited October 14, 2017 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

Oh Oh Oh carriages!

 

Centre picture, Midland clerestories: leading, a 48' square light lavatory brake composite to D508. The second and third carriages are a bit indistinct but I think the second might be a 54' square light corridor brake composite to D470 and the third probably a 54' round-panelled corridor carriage; from the rearward position of the guard's lookout (bespeaking a short brake compartment), probably also a brake composite to D559.

 

That's a very characteristic short Midland train - all three brake composites could be for different destinations, or at least two for one and one for another - or the non-corridor carriage a strengthener. I haven't got a copy of a carriage marshalling document for this period that covers these workings (my interests being more westerly) but I'll have a look in the Midland Railway Study Centre catalogue.

 

I'm pretty ignorant on Great Northern matters but I guess that in the top picture those are mostly 6-wheeled GNR carriages transferred to the Joint whereas the big clerestory and elliptical roof bogies in the bottom picture have worked through from Kings Cross?

 

Is that cattle wagon a GN design or a Melton Constable original?

 

Sorry, Stephen, had meant to ask about the coaches.

 

Very helpful!

 

As I understand things, a number of 6-well and 4-wheel coaches were transferred from both the Midland and GN in 1903, so, pre-1914, I assume that any bogie vehicles that look to be either Midland or GN will be Midland or GN.  Of course, I suppose some of the GN 6-wheeled stock on the system might be GN ex-King's Cross.

 

EDIT: Yes, it would be good to identify the cattle wagon.  Logically it would be a Great Northern design, though it looks like a 1910 GE wagon, but won't be!

Edited October 14, 2017 by Edwardian

[Donw]

Nice pictures. Picture 2 of the last lot presumably at Gedney shows very clearly a trap point of the two blade type. Remis of me I know but I never added any to the track plan for CA. There would definitely be one between the the mainline turnouts and the goods siding ones. There probably should also be one btween the loop turnout and the first one. Trap points are essentially just a part turnout they can be made dummy or just quietly forgotten the risk of a wagon rolling unintended into the path of a passenger train is not serious in 4mm.

 

Don

[Edwardian]

Nice pictures. Picture 2 of the last lot presumably at Gedney shows very clearly a trap point of the two blade type. Remis of me I know but I never added any to the track plan for CA. There would definitely be one between the the mainline turnouts and the goods siding ones. There probably should also be one btween the loop turnout and the first one. Trap points are essentially just a part turnout they can be made dummy or just quietly forgotten the risk of a wagon rolling unintended into the path of a passenger train is not serious in 4mm.

 

Don

 

Thanks, Don.

 

Since we are going to the trouble of largely hand-built track, perhaps we should make the effort to include dummy trap-points?

 

Would it be possible to supply a plan showing exactly what I would lay and where?

[Compound2632]

Sorry, Stephen, had meant to ask about the coaches.

 

Very helpful!

 

As I understand things, a number of 6-well and 4-wheel coaches were transferred from both the Midland and GN in 1903, so, pre-1914, I assume that any bogie vehicles that look to be either Midland or GN will be Midland or GN.  Of course, I suppose some of the GN 6-wheeled stock on the system might be GN ex-King's Cross.

 

EDIT: Yes, it would be good to identify the cattle wagon.  Logically it would be a Great Northern design, though it looks like a 1910 GE wagon, but won't be!

 

According to Lacy & Dow, Midland Carriages Vol 2 (WSP, 1986), p. 178 (I think you have this?), the 66 Midland carriages transferred were 11 composites, 2 brake composites, 32 third class, 9 brake thirds, 10 passenger brake vans, a third class saloon and a horsebox (C & W Cttee minute of 6 March 1903). There were a further 5 carriages transferred in October 1903, 2 thirds, 2 brake thirds, and another PBV (Lacy & Dow Vol. 2 p. 185). Since none of these are described as 'bogie', I assume they were all 6-wheelers except the PBVs which were the very numerous 25' 4-wheelers to D529, which would be becoming rather unsuitable for main line work by 1903 (Lacy & Dow Vol. 2 p.269). The composites would be the 31' centre-luggage type to D516 - like the very well-known example in the NRM collection - third vehicle in the Gedney train. The second vehicle is a 31' 5-compartment third, D493. The brake thirds would also be 31' carriages, D504, but the brake composites must be the 32' vehicles of D534, originally built a slip carriages - and again, unsuitable for main-line work by 1903; indeed, four 50' square light clerestory slip composites were built in 1903, D533. These two types of 6-wheel brake carriages look superficially similar but from the even panel widths between the compartments I'd say the leading coach in the Gedney train is a brake third.

 

The picnic saloon is presumably the one now on the NNR, D465, though that is identified as a first class saloon, MR No. 1616 of Lot 102, built in 1886 (Vintage Carriages Trust). I think they've got the Lot number and class designation wrong there; close reading of Lacy & Dow (Vol. 2, p. 336) places No. 1616 as a member of Lot 153 of May 1886, taking the number of an old Kirtley saloon - but built as a third class saloon. The only first class saloons were ten built to Lot 103 of February 1884, though both classes of saloon were externally identical and built to the same drawing. There might have been some difference in the upholstery. Lot 102 was for 32' sleeping saloons to D458, quite different in external appearance; confusion may have arisen from Lacy & Dow's supposition that it was one of these that was transferred to the M&GN (Vol. 2 p.344); their research was done well before the recovery of the body of No. 1616. I would imagine that the number  has been established from being stamped or stenciled on parts of the bodywork. The D465 saloon at Butterley carries No. 1260, which makes it one of the 40 third class saloons of Lots 219 (December 1888) and 261 (December 1890). Both have been beautifully restored - what a joy it would be if they could be seen running in the same excursion. A grand Edwardian jaunt for the completion of tracklaying on the WNR?

 

Anyway, all this group of carriages would have been built in the mid 1880s so would be around 16 - 18 years old when transferred to the Joint. Lacy & Dow (Vol. 2 p.183) infer that some of the thirds were already on the duplicate list and that there was some accounting sleight of hand going on which meant that the Joint was subsidising new Midland carriages.

 

Yes, D299! One would be surprised not to see one.

Edited October 14, 2017 by Compound2632

[Donw]

Thanks, Don.

 

Since we are going to the trouble of largely hand-built track, perhaps we should make the effort to include dummy trap-points?

 

Would it be possible to supply a plan showing exactly what I would lay and where?

 

I will do something I think it would be worth it. 

 

Don

[Edwardian]

Well, I've got about as far as these fellows: