Cornish Chronicles - St. Breward Junction

[Brinkly]

Thank you for your comments gents.

 

I must confess, I don't know which way round the gates go! I have opted for three sections, rather than two, using Nanstallon as the prototype. I think the crossing at Boscarne was very narrow, more farm track, than a country lane.

 

Evening Neil,

 

Thanks for your comment. I think part of the lack of progress with Horrabridge, is down to getting a bit bogged down with it. I went through a phase of being almost slavish to the prototype and I think that was the wrong decision. St. Breward means I can have a fresh start and, as you said, let the project evolve into a model.

 

Anyway, tomorrow I'm going to pop into town and pick up some very, very thin plywood to use as a firm road bed.

 

Kind regards,

Nick.

[Stubby47]

Rather than plywood, why not laminate some cardboard ( cereal packets ) into the shape you need ?

[Maurice Hopper]

Nick,

 

Stick with the ply! (Sorry about that.) It will be worth the trip to town to have something that is more dimensionally stable and water resilient when you start ballasting.

 

Try and find a long, straight and narrow offcut of something - 12 mm ply, Conti board - to put your array of weights on so you get a good flat finish. You may want to put a piece of paper between this and the thin ply when glueing, in case the glue 'catches' it all.

 

I will be most interested in which way you do this.... Ply glued to extruded polystyrene or track glued to the ply and then lay it as a single unit. I have been planning the latter for my home layout in 1/64th Scale but have not got round to the experiments yet. The tendency might be for the ply to curve if attached to the track first. As you are using ready made track it would probably be easier to drop it straight onto a fixed, flat ply surface. I will be building the track from components that will be easier off the board for at least some locations on the layout. I also intend to work on C&L foam underlay so it will be better to build on a firm, off-board surface.

 

On St Juliot I laid the cork straight onto the extruded polystyrene...being careful to get it flat. I think a thin ply would be better as used on Tresparret Wharf and Lambeth Walk, where two laminations of 0.8mm ply and the centre core of the blue stuff make the whole baseboard!

 

(Nick, The timing off this post does not indicate progress... Just another rather sleepless night)

[Stubby47]

Ah, for road bed I assumed road as in vehicular, whereas it could also mean track bed.

 

In which case ply wood would be much better.

[The Fatadder]

Very nice Nick, look forward to seeing it progress.

[RailWest]

With regard to the 'hang' of the gates, photographs here http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/bodmin-to-padstow.html show that at both Boscarne Jcn and Nanstallon the gates were hung on the RH post as viewed from the road.

[Gwiwer]

With regard to the 'hang' of the gates, photographs here http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/bodmin-to-padstow.html show that at both Boscarne Jcn and Nanstallon the gates were hung on the RH post as viewed from the road.

 

 

Give you those.  But it was less usual that way round.

[Maurice Hopper]

What a wonderful set of pictures on the CRS website of the Bodmin, Wadebridge and Padstow lines.

 

..... And there we have it! The evidence that the gates were hung on the right.

 

Excellent

[Brinkly]

Hi gents,

 

Thank you for your interest and comments. Not a lot has happened today on the modelling front. I did pop into Plymouth this morning and bought a couple of sheets of very thin plywood to use as the track bed. I've also started building the first point this afternoon. I'll share some photos later.

 

Over a cup of tea and a couple of rich tea buscuits, I found quite a few photographs of the level crossings at Boscarne and Nanstallon. Interesting, as Maurice said above, both sets of gatess are hung from the right hand side.

 

Boscarne is quite interesting; one side is made up of two independent gates and the other side is one singular unit. However, Nanastallon is made up of two, 3-bar (really not sure if this is the right term!) gates. 

 

Below are a couple of photos.

 

Boscarne.

 

 

Nanstallon.

 

 

Food for thought!

 

Regards,

Nick

[RailWest]

Most interesting - I wish I could find such detailed pix for other level-crossings!

 

Curious about the made-up gate at Boscarne and certainly not something that could be spotted IMHO from most of the known photos showing that part of the area.

[Maurice Hopper]

Brilliant pictures. Don't forget the pedestrian wickets on each side.

 

Bars on a gate are the horizontal members.... As in a five bar gate... Rails closer at the bottom to stop small stock, with wider gaps further up.

 

The cross sections could be called 'bays', as in a building having so many bays in a side... For example each window in a church is a separate bay.

Edited August 3, 2016 by Maurice Hopper

[St Enodoc]

Hate to see Horrabridge go, Nick, but needs be I suppose.  To compensate, I'm glad you decided to go to Cornwall.  Horrabridge wasn't exactly a Clapham Junction but St Breward appears to have less operating potential. Or is that not a negative?  But as its non proto, no doubt alterations could be made as new industry might be found locally.

 

One potential layout which has not appeared AFAIK, is the proposed extension of the Looe and Caradon Railway to the North Cornwall line.  Similar potential to yours.  Anyway, good luck with the project and look forward to seeing it come to fruition.

 

Brian.

Iain Rice did this donkeys' years ago - the North Cornwall Mineral Railway as I recall.

 

Edited for spelling and punctuation

Edited August 3, 2016 by St Enodoc

[St Enodoc]

 

St. Breward Junction

 

BR Southern Region Layout Circa 1960

Introduction

 

I thought I might break cover with this project, as I’ve been asked quite a few times what I’m up to modelling wise and the truth is quite a bit, despite appearances to the contrary!

 

A side note in this saga is also space, or in my case a lack of! This is significant factor in the lack of layout progress with Horrabridge’s development. At the moment I don’t have a dedicated space for a large layout (19 by 11 foot is Horrabridge’s overall size). My original plan was to locate the layout in the loft, but the extremes of temperature in the summer and winter, mean that I can’t really work up there, coupled with the lack of any natural light and the space really is quite unusable – so I’ve ruled out using it.

 

Since mid-2014 I have considered building a small starter layout, rather than jumping straight in with Horrabridge. At the time I was working away from Devon and carting a large project around really wasn’t ideal. This small project would develop a large number of practical skills; track building, wiring, signalling, buildings and scenery, not to mention a test bed for stock. All good practice for Horrabridge.

 

In late April 2015 I decided to end my year-long exile in Kent and moved back home to Devon in the July. So the smaller starter project layout was put on the back burner. The main reason for this was Scaleforum of that year. DRAG members were heavily involved with show, presenting a small slice of what we were up to as an area group. I volunteered Horrabridge as part of the exhibition, presenting it as a ‘working progress’ from an ‘inexperienced modeller’. So over the summer holiday I erected the layout either out in the garden, or in the front room, both being dependant on the weather and what I was doing. I managing to work around the space issue and lay a small amount of track. However, once I returned from Scaleforum the modelling mojo seemed to disappear; the fuel that had once powered Horrabridge’s progress seemed to turn into vapour and work on the layout didn’t restart and to this day still hasn’t restarted.

 

One major decision that I have made is to revert back to finescale 00, which I think is the most sensible choice in both the short and the long terms; my P4 modelling will now focus purely with DRAG’s Bodmin General layout. But the key factor in all this, is still the lack of space.

 

Now it isn’t all doom and gloom. In November of last year, I started a new relationship with a lovely girl called Carrie, so any modelling work really ground to a complete halt! One evening (back in March 2016) I was moaning to Carrie (in a good way!) that I needed to do something other than school work. She suggested getting Horrabridge out, but as I said really it is too big and another problem is that I haven’t really built a model railway before. Carrie replied, ‘Well why don’t you work on a smaller project first?’ I said that isn’t a bad idea and mentioned that I had thought about it before. That evening, whilst I was cooking dinner, Carrie came in from the dining room into the kitchen saying ‘Are these any good? It would save you a lot of time and effort.’ The photo being Tim Horn’s laser cut boards (if you head towards the bottom of the site, you can see the MDF examples). The next thing I know a set of three, 3ft by 1ft plywood cameo boards were ordered, giving me a much more achievable potential project. I really am very lucky! She is great!

 

In search of a ‘prototype’

 

With the above chapter, or essay, out of the way the more interesting bits start!

 

Whilst being in exile, I carried out quite a lot of research for the starter project. I have particular fondness for the ex LSWR & GWR in the South West, but when one looks a various OS and railway maps, you discover just how well served various communities were in Britain!

 

One aspect of my own modelling philosophy is that I like to model real locations, or model something that had a fair chance of being built in the first instance. I also prefer to watch a train in the landscape, or travelling through it. Slow branch lines hold greater appeal to me than a large, busy mainline. I’m not so keen on terminus schemes, so this provided criteria and a clear starting point for the project;

 

• Ex LSWR or ex GWR prototype,
• Set in Devon or Cornwall (possibility Dorset),
• A scheme based on a real place or locality (village or small town),
• Ideally a through station, or slice of railway landscape,
• Set in the countryside,
• Branch line operation,
• Not a terminus.

 

A fair part of this philosophy was formed after watching various model railways and operating Maurice Hopper’s Country Boards at the Exeter model railway show in May 2014. Maurice’s operating practice focused on half a dozen different passenger and freight trains slowly plodding through the landscape, some freight trains stopping occasionally to shunt the small brickworks siding when running in one direction. Reasonably lengthen trains, but lots of different small locomotives and stock to look at and appreciate.

 

I did think for quite a while about linking the small project to Horrabridge, perhaps making a Coryton style station, but I have a pair of Beattie Well tanks. These Well Tanks seem to have some form of magical power over me, as I could not ignore their modelling potential!

 

bodminrailmap.jpg

Bodmin, despite being small, was particularly well served with lines.

 

LSWR-D31008.jpg

Boscarne Junction and the lines surrounding Bodmin influenced my decision making heavily!

 

Since purchasing my Well Tanks when Kernow released them, I’ve found my modelling interest slowly slide towards the LSWR. My late Grandfather modelled the LSWR, so I imagine that is also a source of the interest. I felt that if I build an ex LSWR layout, my mojo would return and this would spark interest and enthusiasm for Horrabridge once again.

 

St. Breward MK1.jpg

Whilst in Kent, I drew a plan for a small junction based on Dunmere in Cornwall. My idea was to build it in 00-SF to provide a home form the growing number of ex LSWR refugees which seemed to be arriving on a rather regular basis! At that point I had ordered a pair of LSWR O2 tanks, but they hadn’t arrived, but I did have a brace of the for mentioned Well tanks and an M7 loco – certainly enough motive power to operate a small layout once the O2 tanks landed. The recipe was now chosen.

 

The Model

 

As I mentioned earlier Britain was incredibly well served with railway lines before the Beeching cuts, but last year I did discover a selection of potential schemes focused around Bodmin and the Camel Valley in Cornwall.

 

4609054275.jpg

Whilst browsing through my copy of The Bodmin and Wadebridge Railway, 1834 – 1983 by Michael Messenger, I discovered to my delight that various companies between 1860-1880 had a number of plans to extend the branch line running from Dunmere Junction to Wenford Bridge. One scheme extended the line further up the Camel Valley heading due Northwards towards Boscastle, Delabole and Tintagel. The main purpose of the proposed route was for the various tin, slate and clay mining concerns in the area to access the large ports at Padstow and Wadebridge.

 

One scheme in particular had real appeal, it formed a junction just outside of Wenford Bridge goods deport, running through the hamlet of St. Breward and the small village of Churchtown. There was also a proposal to build another branch, in the opposite direction, onto the moors to access the clay works at Durford and Temple. This scheme I feel is the best. The plan suggested construction of a single track, standard gauge line, following the valley towards the two small settlements. Construction would have started, hand the finances been available in the mid-1870s.

 

Proposed railways around Bodmin.jpg

Follow the Wenford Bridge line (red) and then either of the two 1870 ideas would have created some form of facilty at Churchtown and an junction heading up onto the moors.

 

The first version was a simple junction, the idea being that the gated branch went to Wenford Bridge and the other continued up to Churchtown; Churchtown being the terminus as the company ran out of money and never reached Delabole in my scheme! But this original version, which I drew last year, lacks operating potential and the baseboards which Carrie ordered have a total length of 9ft rather than the original 5ft.

 

20160505_200858523_iOS.jpg

Ikea style baseboards!

 

St. Breward MK2.jpg

So back to the drawing board and version 2 has been created – St. Breward Junction. St. Breward Junction has a similar flavour to Boscarne. I hope represents what the LSWR might have built had the line been extended in reality; the signal box and ground frame are based on the structures at Boscarne Junction, as is the simple track plan. This drawing isn't quite as detailed as the first, a 'new' version will be created, but you get the idea. A small wharf siding is provided for the small hamlet of St. Breward, and a simple loop to enable trains to run-round before proceeding up the branch to the moor.

 

The mainline runs between Wenford Bridge and Churchtown, with a branch diverging off to the clay pits located at Temple and Durford on Bodmin Moor. There is a small a goods loop and a wharf siding, so typical of the whole area. The signal box controls the branch and the level crossing gates, with the ground frame controlling the cross over (which forms the goods loop) and the wharf siding.

 

The curves on the branch would have been eased to allow bogie coaches to run up the line and upgraded to allow heavier locos to run on it. I think this version retains most of the ideas from the original plan, but is operationally more interesting.

 

Building

 

Now, there is an ongoing joke at DRAG that I 'outsource' my modelling to third parties, partly true! (But only with regard to baseboards!   ) These boards I actually built! And more importantly, they work.

 

Tim Horn's products are excellent and well worth the money. I really don't know how he turns a profit as the timber alone must have been a good £80. Brilliant design, they just work.

 

Below are a selection of photos showing various stages of construction.

 

20160508_185119176_iOS.jpg

Evening work - love the mirror shot! D'oh

 

20160508_192244716_iOS.jpg

Clamped up

 

20160508_192250553_iOS.jpg

I don't think you need clamps, but it really does make life easier. Well worth investing in some for this type of work. Mine came from Axminster Tools and cost about £60 for the lot (3 bar clamps and 8 F clamps).

 

20160530_104538234_iOS.jpg

Out in the garden. Trestles and an old 1980s (older than me!) coffee table top - ideal for a portable workbench. I would like to add, I don't use this in my home! It lives in the garage!! 

 

20160530_114310857_iOS.jpg

Under clamping.

 

20160530_125546041_iOS.jpg

Nearly done.

 

20160530_153514639_iOS.jpg

20160530_153524334_iOS.jpg

Pair of ends - dowels and stoppers.

 

Anyway that is enough for one post! More in a bit.

 

Thanks for reading, please do feel free to comment!

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

 

This looks as though it will grow into a super layout Nick and I will follow with interest.

 

That map is fascinating as the line from Nanstallon/Grogley to Roche is very similar in concept to my Southern connection from Grogley to St Columb Road, while the Fal Vale Railway is the inspiration for a model being built by another Down-Under modeller, KymN of this parish.

 

I can't understand why the cartographer has missed out Pencarne, Penhayle Bay and Treamble/Cubert though...

[Captain Kernow]

With regard to the 'hang' of the gates, photographs here http://www.cornwallrailwaysociety.org.uk/bodmin-to-padstow.html show that at both Boscarne Jcn and Nanstallon the gates were hung on the RH post as viewed from the road.

Well, you can't argue with the evidence, but I must say that hanging the gates on the left does 'feel right', although to my surprise I've found that both sets of single gates on Bleakhouse Road were hinged from the right hand posts!

 

In your case, Nick, I'd go with the prototype practice. You appear to have the choice of 'two bay' gates as per Boscarne, or 'three bay' ones as per Nanstallon. Of course, the 'two bay' example will have the gates closer to the loading gauge envelope of the trains, which visually might be attractive.

 

It was fairly common, I believe, for level crossing widths to exceed those of the roads or lanes that led up to them on either side, however.

 

Will your gates be made functional? If so, I'd be happy to show you how I normally hinge them.

Edited August 3, 2016 by Captain Kernow

[Captain Kernow]

I know the board is flat, and you don't want to cut below it, but can you make the rest of the ground a different height to the track bed ? For example, the road to the crossing doesn't need to be level.

 

 

If the surrounding ground level is lower than the track, that can be visually very satisfying, although you clearly have to bear the prototype topography in mind.

 

In this example on Bleakhouse Road, the road rises up to the crossing very gently, as the surrounding ground area is only about an inch or less lower than the track:

 

In this view, the train has just passed over the level crossing depicted in the first photo:

 

 

Both photos taken by Andy York for previous BRM article.

[Gwiwer]

 

 

I can't understand why the cartographer has missed out Pencarne, Penhayle Bay and Treamble/Cubert though...

 

Would it surprise you to know I receive at least one enquiry every week - and have been getting them for some years now - asking where Penhayle Bay is as they can't find it on maps.  A Google search will however direct users to both the RMweb and Facebook pages

 

If one takes the actual map of Cornwall Penhayle Bay would replace Crantock with its sandy beach and dunes and Trehelgan would be roughly where the hamlet of Rejerrah is.

[Captain Kernow]

Anything more to report, Nick?

[brianusa]

The photo with the Pannier and its train is truly fantastic, as real as it gets!  The 45xx is almost as good but the tree, fine though it may be, gives it away.  (I should criticise!)

 

Brian.

[Captain Kernow]

The photo with the Pannier and its train is truly fantastic, as real as it gets!  The 45xx is almost as good but the tree, fine though it may be, gives it away.  (I should criticise!)

 

Brian.

Thanks Brian.

 

These days I would take some lessons in advanced tree making from our true local Master, John Farmer (Re6/6).

[RailWest]

If I might be excused a bit of a digression.....

 

Although not all details are known, it is believed that (the real) Boscarne Junction signal-box was opened in 1888 with a 14-lever frame. This has been extended to 21 by the time of a BoT Inspection in 1895 icw the re-opening of the reconstructed Bodmin North line, and was eventually 26 levers after the 1914 layout alterations. Also about the late 1890s the train-staff-&-ticket working to Wadebridge, Bodmin North and Bodmin General (also called Town) was replaced by electric train tablet to the first two and electric train staff on the GWR line, necessitating space for three large-ish instruments. All these alterations no doubt contributed to the extension of the box superstructure at the Bodmin end.

 

According to an earlier post, at St Breward Jcn all the pointwork at the Wenford end will be worked from the ground-frame. This leaves the SB itself to work just the gate bolt, the junction points + FPL, a GF release and all the running signals, which IMHO could be easily accommodated with no more than 16 levers at most. Assuming just two ETT instruments and (say) OES on the goods line, then I would suggest that it could have squeezed into the 'original' box without the need for an extension.

 

OK, so you've built the box already, so that may all seem a bit irrelevant now - it just needs a good 'cover story' now as to why it needed an extension :-)

[brianusa]

Its safe to say that a lot of our layouts are overdone. In some cases its because we like to have those items that appeal and 'look right' even if its not prototypical.

 

Brian.

[RailWest]

brianusa, on 06 Aug 2016 - 22:44, said:

Its safe to say that a lot of our layouts are overdone. In some cases its because we like to have those items that appeal and 'look right' even if its not prototypical.

 

Brian.

Quite right, which actually is exactly why I commented on it!

 

My personal view is that boxes with extensions often look 'odd', especially in a case such as Boscarne Junction where the top is so obviously longer than the bottom. If you take Crediton as an example, then I feel that that the old unaltered East box (later a GF) looked more 'right' than the current extended (former West) box. Whilst it was not unknown, for various reasons, to have a SB that was considerably larger than demanded by the actual layout in use, to my eyes it looks 'wrong' on a model especially one that is quite small and 'simple' anyway. But of course the builder is the boss

[Donw]

Just foud this Nick loooks a nice project. Top mark to Carrie for giving you a kick start!

 

Comment It is always good to have the track raised a little even in a cutting the cess and a small bit of ground alongside will normally be below the track level.

 

Don

[Brinkly]

Greetings,

 

I thought it was about time for an update, and a slight change of plan. Nothing radical, but something a little more achievable. 

 

When I heard about Peco's new Bullhead points, my initial thoughts were to use that track for St. Breward. However Peco suggested in a recent email that it they wouldn't be ready until the summer and I really want to crack on and see what would fit and work in the space this holiday.  

 

I've seen Chris Nevard and Andy P use bullhead flexible track, with Code 75 points to good effect on their layouts. So this morning, being the first day of the Easter holiday, I popped up to my local model shop and purchased a couple of additional lengths of Peco bullhead track and code 75 points and traps for a smaller version St. Breward Junction. I also bought a couple of sheets of A1 foam board, to use as a temporary surface, as I didn't want to dig the the two wooden boards out of the loft.

 

I'm not totally convinced by the mixture of track myself, but having said that I think with careful painting, ballasting and weathering I think I can live with it. Even if I don't proceed with this combination, I do now have a much better idea of what will and won't work in the space that I have available. I might experiment with painting, ballasting and weathering a piece, just to see what it looks like over the next couple of days. If I don't like it, I will invest the time in building the 4 points and 2 traps out of C&L parts.

 

The original boards were a trio measuring 3ft by 1ft, however, I've opted to reduce this to 6ft by 1ft and move the siding to the rear of the set up, rather than the front. 

 

 

Anyway thoughts are welcome as always!

 

Kind regards,

Nick.

 

 

[Andrew P]

Greetings,

 

I thought it was about time for an update, and a slight change of plan. Nothing radical, but something a little more achievable. 

 

When I heard about Peco's new Bullhead points, my initial thoughts were to use that track for St. Breward. However Peco suggested in a recent email that it they wouldn't be ready until the summer and I really want to crack on and see what would fit and work in the space this holiday.  

 

I've seen Chris Nevard and Andy P use bullhead flexible track, with Code 75 points to good effect on their layouts. So this morning, being the first day of the Easter holiday, I popped up to my local model shop and purchased a couple of additional lengths of Peco bullhead track and code 75 points and traps for a smaller version St. Breward Junction. I also bought a couple of sheets of A1 foam board, to use as a temporary surface, as I didn't want to dig the the two wooden boards out of the loft.

 

FullSizeRender (3).jpg

I'm not totally convinced by the mixture of track myself, but having said that I think with careful painting, ballasting and weathering I think I can live with it. Even if I don't proceed with this combination, I do now have a much better idea of what will and won't work in the space that I have available. I might experiment with painting, ballasting and weathering a piece, just to see what it looks like over the next couple of days. If I don't like it, I will invest the time in building the 4 points and 2 traps out of C&L parts.

 

The original boards were a trio measuring 3ft by 1ft, however, I've opted to reduce this to 6ft by 1ft and move the siding to the rear of the set up, rather than the front. 

 

IMG_3277.JPG

 

Anyway thoughts are welcome as always!

 

Kind regards,

Nick.

As you say Nick, I've used Bullhead and Code 75 Points on Trewithen, and now that it's painted and Ballasted I'm really pleased with my little effort.

 

I hope you can now get something moving, and the Smaller Board is a good idea.

 

All the best.