Rufford Red Lion Square

[James Harrison]

Well, if I'm going to build a loco fitted with push-pull gear I might as well model a push-pull train, mightn't I?  Tucked away in one of my Dow volumes I've found some loose sheets- photocopies of an old Railway Modeller (1969 ish?) with drawings of the GC steam railmotors after conversion to autotrailers, also (albeit technically too late for my period) drawings of GC 1st suburbans as converted (in the middle 1930s) to van composites to run with same. 

 

A little investigation work;

-When first converted to autotrailers, the ex-railmotors were paired with LDEC 6-wheelers and coupled to 2-4-2 tanks;

-In the 1930s the 6-wheelers were replaced with ex-suburban 1sts and the 2-4-2s gave way to 4-4-2 tanks.

 

Which puts me in a bit of a quandry because I prefer the idea of the autotrailer being paired with the larger carriage and the smaller locomotive.  It's a blindspot I can live with but I've no doubt it will keep the pedants awake at night. 

 

Something else that will keep them awake at night is how I'm proposing to go about modelling the autotrailer.  The way I feel most comfortable tackling it is via a hackbash, which means using an old Dapol GWR autocoach, which is about 6mm or so too long to be true to scale for the GC type.  I think that extra length can easily be lost in the myriad of windows, doors and mullions. 

[richard i]

Or the extra length can be cut out. 
you could do the sides as plasticard cut out on to the frame of the auto coach so you don’t have to fight the windows etc.

my steam railmotor has stalled. Just motor bogie, and roof to go. Put away until I can find a solution. The only model I started but have not finished yet. I am not a fan of half finished projects.

richard 

[James Harrison]

Time to stop prevaricating, I think.  I've said previously that my house takes priority over my layout and that remains the case, but the reality of it is that there's a practical limit to how long I can spend (and how much money I can spend) before I need a break.  If the last two years are anything to go by, it's somewhere around 6 to 8 months between starting a new build 'season' and finding my patience and resources exhausted, and then needing another 4 to 6 months to replenish both before another go at it. 

 

So, let's be honest- I would have to be indulging in some serious chequebook modelling for my expenditure on RLS to match what I spend on the house.  Whilst there are improvements I would like to make to the railway room, there's nothing inherently wrong with it right now that is a show-stopper.

 

So what's the hold up then?

1) The room's basically been filled up with 'stuff' haphazard

2) It's occasionally used as a workshop for work in other rooms

3) There's so much 'stuff' in there that any attempt to clear out and tidy up in anything approaching a sane manner peters out

.... And that's about it. Other than

4) Waiting on Peco to get their long-promised perpetually-delayed bullhead points, slips and crossings to market. 

 

Well let's ignore 4) for the moment, let's look at what I have got

1) Cremorne & Pittance- the station is pretty much 'done'

2) An area at least at the back of the railway room that could be cleared, for a given value of, fairly painlessly

3) Enthusiam and impatience in about equal measure

 

So what am I driving at? 

Broadly, building the whole of RLS in one go would be daunting, at the least.  I've always thought of approaching it in phases.  I've already got a principal feature of one of the phases built- even if I have to tear it largely apart to actually make final use of it- and the longer it sits forelornly on the floor in a corner of the railway room, the more chance there is for it to get ruined.  So, why am I not, right now, trying to get it built into a more permanent form, up off the floor?  It's a good question and everything I've listed above is only more of a nuisance and hindrance than making the notion a total non-starter. 

 

Therefore, I think it might be reasonable to set myself a goal that by the end of the year I have the following achieved:

1) Permanent baseboards built for the storage roads and Cremorne & Pittance section;

2) Cremorne & Pittance fitted into those boards and built into its final form;

3) Scenic and trackwork* extended out from Cremorne & Pittance towards the end of those boards.

*Dependent upon availability of aforementioned Peco track

 

Would this give me a working layout? No.  Would it at least start to clear up the railway room?  Yes.  Would it perk up my get up and go?  Yes.  When can I start?  Pretty much right now....

[brumtb]

Watching from afar and wishing you all the best.  The thing is to keep going forward, however small the steps.

 

Tony

[James Harrison]

I've made a start clearing out at least enough of the railway room to let me expand Cremorne & Pittance, but once I'd got the easier bits out the way (the car parts that needed to be taken down to the garage, the DIY tools that could be packed away and put in the cupboard under the stairs etc), things obviously got more difficult as it started to take on the nature of an archaeological excavation.  A bit like Tom Rolt's experience of sorting out Tywyn Wharf's booking office...

 

This might take a little longer than I expected, sorting the wheat from the chaff and then stowing it away neatly. 

[James Harrison]

Whilst the Time Team dig is going on in the railway room, progress is also being made with the next item of rolling stock. 

 

It's pointless my building a push-pull fitted 2-4-2 tank, if I don't have the push-pull stock to go with it. 

 

So I bought a cheap old Airfix/ Mainline autocoach and broke out the toolbox.  This thing came apart, after a bit of a struggle, and left me bogies (useful), underframe (useful), body (uhm...) and roof (useful).  After cutting the trussing and battery boxes off the underframe I turned my frustrations onto the body. 

 

 

The glazing was firmly fixed in and going nowhere, so cutting away the top half of the body was a bit fraught at first.  Once about half o the window mullions were gone the glazing fell out easily enough. 

 

 

That eventually left something that looked a bit like one of those open top Blackpool trams.  Now to get the seating out, as that needs to change.  Ah, joy, it's moulded into the floor... 

 

Incidentally, the plastic this thing is made of is atrocious.  It is like carving tallow, or soap. 

 

 

Well, I got all the seating out- after a bit of a struggle- and then I needed to cut what was left of the body into the two saloons. 

 

That concludes the cutting phase of the build, now I can start to put it all together again...

[richard i]

It is on the way up from here. The difficult bit is done. 
richard 

[James Harrison]

From this point I agree, there's a blueprint to follow and an idea of how I'm going to do it.  The difficult part is usually the decision-making process around the dismantling and cutting up phase and the compromises to be made between cutting 'here' to avoid an awkward bit later or cutting 'there' for a better final result.

 

Honestly, if I'd known I'd have had to reduce the autocoach to this extent I very much doubt the project would have begun.  I think enthusiasm possibly got the better of me there. 

[James Harrison]

If I'm in earnest about pushing Red Lion Square forward this year, I'd best make a start, hadn't I?

 

 

So, what I have done is to take my trackplan and draw in around it the walls of the room (that's the blue outer line).  I've got 9' along the top wall to play with between corner and doorframe, which neatly splits down into 3 3' boards.  I am allowing 7' 6" on the side wall (this is more like 9' again, however bear in mind that measures into an ingle nook and a chimneybreast stands out into the room).  Then I've got 12' available on the bottom wall and I'm making use of about 11' of that. 

 

Broadly, what I am saying is- if I design for a typical 3' long baseboard module I need 6 of them, plus a pair that are 2' 6" long.  In terms of baseboard width I've sketched up for a uniform 2' 6" throughout. 

 

Having sketched in my baseboard modules I have then found out that as originally drawn CfP straddles a baseboard joint.  I'm not in favour of cutting a decent photo plank in half!  So what I intend to do is to move CfP onto the top left board- in its entirety- it means that the trackwork will need to be taken up (you'll note there's a crossover which now needs to be installed) but all of the existing scenic work can otherwise remain as-is.  Except I might re-work the retaining wall behind the platform shelter, and move the overbridge.  The overbridge you may recall exists as a low relief model, if left as-is I will need to widen it and the baseboard joint will run down the middle of the road!  Whereas if I lose the half of the road I've already modelled, and move the bridge just a few inches, the baseboard joint will run at the edge of the road and I can disguise it more easily. 

 

Moving onto the new board, what I plan here is a typical GCR / late MSLR timber signal box (the Wills kit) overlooking a very small yard.  I appreciate that the overbridge means the signalman cannot see the platform starters or the crossover in the station however I don't believe that to be a requisite- I know my own local line until it was resignalled and electrified a few years ago had instances at both Hednesford and Bloxwich boxes of signals being beyond overbridges. 

 

The big green patch in the drawing is where I'm proposing a long transition curve, 2' deep and 5' across, to serve as the RLS- CfP running line.  My thoughts on levels are that ideally I want to be able to access the storage yard from below CfP- if the CfP rails are at a datum of 0 then I see the storage yard rails being at -4 inches.  To avoid a steep incline out of the yard I then see the RLS rails at -2 inches, ergo trains out of RLS toward CfP have a slight gradient to climb whilst trains toward Worksop have a slight descent.  I'm hopeful that as the Worksop line drops out of sight below the CfP route, by the time the storage yard entry is reached the level difference is such that it can be disguised by buildings and trees rather than a tunnel or overbridge- the track should be low enough that the trains drop out of sight and the scenery should disguise that the Worksop line makes a turn and stops behind CfP... 

 

The Worksop line I haven't yet fully planned out, you may notice in comparison with the original plan I've pushed it further back toward the wall.  Once it is out of the storage yard I want it to make a long gentle curve into RLS rather than a straight then 90-degree turn.  Quick measure off the plan as present suggests I need a curve about 4'6" in the x-x axis and about 2'6" in the y-y, and naturally it also needs to avoid the curve for the CfP line. 

 

In any case, I've got my initial 6' x 2' 6" cleared, for a given value of, I've re-jigged the relevant part of the plan where required, now if I serious about this I want to be looking planning the first pair of boards and the scenery behind CfP over the storage yard. 

[Edwardian]

Bravo, James!

 

With the forthcoming house move and the prospect of a bespoke insulated shed for CA, I, too, am experiencing such a moment of Renewed Determination.

 

We both stand upon the Threshold of Greatness, my friend, and the Gates of Glory stand open before us!

[James Harrison]

Well, I made good use of the down time and I think I've managed to finally sort out the trackplan. 

 

 

I do like how there is very little track that is parallel to the board edges.  Also bear in mind that the intention remains that the 180-degree curves are going to be transitional; I just haven't sussed out how I can do that in SCARM. 

 

I've even managed to give myself two yards flanking Red Lion Square station.  I decided that as the station has three platform faces and a centre road it's not a major operational handicap for goods to use one of those as an entry/ exit line (how likely is it that the confluence of two secondary routes would need all three platform faces at once....) I've also accepted that in doing this it means that when freights do turn up they're going to working over the station throat, but then that means that I've a reason for shunting to be leisurely and punctuated by the arrival and departure of passenger workings.  Roughly I'm thinking of a coal yard and loading bank and cattle dock in the top yard and a goods warehouse in the lower yard. 

[richard i]

Are the tracks leading to the turntable going to be hidden?

richard 

[Caley Jim]

I particularly like the fact that the majority of track is not parallel to the baseboard edge.  Makes it much less 'train set like'.

 

Jim

[James Harrison]

1 hour ago, richard i said:

Are the tracks leading to the turntable going to be hidden?

richard 

The turntable and the yard that leads off it (basically up to a point just beyond where the exit road splits into up and down lines) is all going to be hidden.  In fact what I have in mind is that the single track branch is going to rise whilst the double track main is going to drop, so in section the turntable and its yard are going to be probably 4' below Cremorne & Pittance. 

[James Harrison]

There were a few bits of the trackplan, the goods yard area mostly, that I was unhappy with, so I've spent a little time doodling and I've come up with an arrangement I quite like the look of. 

 

 

So, reminder, goods workings actually terminate or start from the RLS's middle road and are tripped over to the yard proper in short cuts.  Brake vans go into the very short siding, most vehicles go into the sidings coming off the Y (which I see as having a large goods shed/ warehouse).  Outside of that there's a mileage siding.  Coming off the headshunt I've got a kickback which is probably going to be a coal merchant.  If I get bored of four sidings at RLS and one siding at CfP (and trip workings between the two and through freights that need to reverse) there's still a bit of room on the Worksop side (double track side) of the throat for another yard.  A private siding, perhaps....- however my preference would be to use that space to indulge in town planning and architectural modelling. 

 

I'm (very) open to advice here how I can signal the layout generally, I'm not aware of any signalling peculiarities the GC indulged in (at least, it doesn't keep me awake at night thinking about it) so if anybody has general thoughts or comments to make for how to signal the layout prototypically for the pre-grouping era by all means jump in!

 

 

 

 

[James Harrison]

A little while ago Graeme King on the LNER forum mentioned an acquaintance of his had drawn up and printed parts for Barnum carriages, contact was made, money changed hands and a box arrived.  I'm the pleased owner now of two open third saloons and a brake third. 

 

 

 

The quality of the prints I think is really quite outstanding, I should point out that these are practically complete kits (the builder just has to source wheels, couplings and buffers).  I believe that the carriages are modelled in their LNER appearance, with some of the ventilators replaced with small windows and some additional roof furniture, but I can turn a blind eye to that. 

 

So, as you can see, I've teaked the first of them and then I'll be moving on to paint the roof and ceiling before looking at the underframes.  I'm debating whether to review my current approach to couplings, these could be finished with my usual coaching stock Kadees or I might fit them up with three links. 

[Compound2632]

4 hours ago, James Harrison said:

A little while ago Graeme King on the LNER forum mentioned an acquaintance of his had drawn up and printed parts for Barnum carriages

 

Are these the same as the one Tony wright is doing?

 

 

 

[James Harrison]

8 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Are these the same as the one Tony wright is doing?

 

 

 

Yes, I think it is.

[James Harrison]

 

Now you might think that not much has changed since the last update but- there's a lot of painting to be done on one of these.  The roof, ceiling and internal sides are now all painted and I've started on the partitions and the seating. 

[James Harrison]

Well, I've pushed on with the first of my Barnums but I've been brought to a screeching halt as there are no buffers in the kit.  I know that Wizard Models make some, but they're currently 'out of stock' on their website so until they're available there's no point carrying on, is there?

 

So I've resorted to my stash of Ratio 48' carriages.  I know they're Midland diagrams and not GC but I can live with the differences. 

 

And I've also been fettling with the trackplan some more.  Something about how I've got the main terminus planned doesn't quite ring true and I can't put my finger on it, despite having redrafted a few times now.  But- I know that Marylebone has been drawn up for 10' length in set track, so I'm wondering if that could be put into flexitrack and medium turnouts in the same sort of length.  Bearing in mind that I'd then need to make a 90-degree turn in 2'- which I think would have the longer mainline stock complaining.  Those Barnums barely squeek around a 20" radius at dead slow... but then if I increase the radius I'm cutting down the length available for station throat and platforms to the point I've only got 3' platform lengths... so a 4-4-0 and 3 60" carriages would be my maximum train length. 

 

Well, if I accept that- and realistically I think I'll have to- that's still room for 4 48' or 50' carriages and a small 4-4-0, or 3 60'ers and an atlantic.  The 'problem' is- by my 1918/22 period, even if I say RLS is a bit of a backwater, I've still got large 2-8-0s on coal traffic. 

I could get around a lot of my issues- real or imagined- by backdating to say 1910/14, which considering that allows me to run both teak and chocolate and cream coaching stock, is appealing, but it means needing more engines of the sort that are already hard to come by.

 

Hmm.

[richard i]

Try dean gwr buffers they seemed to have more of the look when I had a go at my 4 Barnums.

[James Harrison]

Aah; now that's something to ponder.  Thanks- I'll have a look.

[James Harrison]

Well, I've run some numbers and I've got a loco stud of somewhere around 15 - 20 engines that would be suitable for the pre-1914 period. 

 

The best way, I think, to see if this is something I really want to do is the same way I dipped my toe into pregrouping in the first place- paint one item into the appropriate livery and see how much I enjoy it (and whether I like the result).  So to that end I've bought some chocolate and cream paint and I'm going to finish my current 48' carriage project in the 1903- 08 GCR livery (which hung around until at least 1910  and probably longer).  We'll see how this goes...

[James Harrison]

Well, I've had a go and this is the result so far:

 

 

So with a steady hand, good light, a lot of patience and a thin brush I think I can achieve an acceptable result.   

[richard i]

Flooding the cream is sometimes easier than trying to paint in the thin brown lines second. If you catch my drift.

richard