Brierley Canal Road

[Booking Hall]

stunning result. really enjoyed following this thread and seeing the transformation of three humble box files. Now, I'm sure I heard you mention boxes 4 through to 38...        after Trawden perhaps ?

Andy

Thanks Andy, I'll bring it down to the club (if I can get it in my car, that is  ) in a couple of weeks so you can see it 'in the flesh' so to speak. But yes, I have cut an opening in the other end of the fiddle yard box to anticipate future developments!

[mjcampbell]

You've done a cracking job with this, a really characterful scene. 

[Booking Hall]

Controller now built and tested on my test track. I have to say that the slow running control it provides is streets ahead of anything else I've used, especially with modern motors. Even with quite elderly Hornby 3-pole ringfields it gives very good control, although they are a little noisy. It even managed to 'tame' a "Smokey Joe" which are well known for acting like rockets!

[Booking Hall]

You've done a cracking job with this, a really characterful scene. 

Thanks very much Michael. Just a few tiny details to add now and it's done!

[rue_d_etropal]

Thanks Andy, I'll bring it down to the club (if I can get it in my car, that is  ) in a couple of weeks so you can see it 'in the flesh' so to speak. But yes, I have cut an opening in the other end of the fiddle yard box to anticipate future developments!

The idea of a boxfile layout is to make it easy to transport! Looking forward to seeing it at Padiham.

[Booking Hall]

Hi Glenn, thanks for the kind comments! Glad you're finding this interesting. Setrack points, well, I haven't actually tested them much! They were really the only choice for a layout of this size, and I did quickly run a loco over the trackwork assembled on the desk before installing it, with no apparent problems, but I have to admit that I haven't tested it since installing it - which might be a huge mistake!!! It is possible that I'll get stalling and erratic running (which will rather spoil the operation of a tiny layout like this), in which case I'll have to look at adding extra pickups. 

So, having built the controller I've now had a chance to play with the layout, and found that I get stalling and erratic running. That'll teach me to finish the layout without actually testing the track!!! Despite using predominantly 4-wheel locos, the problem is not so much the dead frog, but the enormous gap between the nose and switch blades. The wheels are simply falling into the gap and lifting the opposite wheel off the track, effectively losing the electrical circuit. Apart from which, seeing rolling stock lurching about like that isn't nice. I knew I should have built my own points!

 

Well, the answer (apart from replacing them with home-made ones) is to reduce the gap somewhat, and that's what I'm trying with plastic microstrip. This in turn is leading to careful checks on the back-to-backs, which were in some cases down to 14mm, so that's no bad thing anyway. Half of one is done and is already giving a much smoother ride over the vee.

 

The other answer is compensation, but I'll try this way first.

Edited September 30, 2017 by Booking Hall

[DanielB]

What a truly fantastic layout you have. Looking at the overall shots, there's no way you'd guess it's a boxfile layout. Truly wonderful work.

[mjcampbell]

Aaaah, the curse of the dead frog!

 

Good luck. It may not help this problem, but have you tried graphite over the rails? It might give the other wheel a better chance...

[Booking Hall]

What a truly fantastic layout you have. Looking at the overall shots, there's no way you'd guess it's a boxfile layout. Truly wonderful work.

Thanks DanielB, I appreciate your comments.

[Booking Hall]

Aaaah, the curse of the dead frog!

 

Good luck. It may not help this problem, but have you tried graphite over the rails? It might give the other wheel a better chance...

Thanks Michael, yes, that was the first thing I tried, but to no avail unfortunately!

[rue_d_etropal]

sounds like the rail might not be dead level. Exactly the same problem can and does happen with electrectrog points.. At least with dead frog points you can wire up point blades so not dependent on tips of point blades to make contact. .

I would say it is more the curse of "finescale" wheels, and loco motors which don't keep moving over short breaks. I tested out a few motor bogies for shunting on my boxfile layout, and most would stall, until I tried a Black Beetle which works superbly. Sometimes you have to put what you would like to run to one side and use something different. You can spend a lot of time fettling the track, and then find something else, which ran OK before, now does not run well.

[Job's Modelling]

Lovely layout with good quality build card models.

Looking forward to more progress.

[Booking Hall]

Brierley Canal Road all packed up to take to the club this evening. Back in March, when I announced that I was going to build a box file layout, I was  branded 'a nutter' (in a friendly way). Hopefully I can change a few minds tonight!

[Booking Hall]

Lovely layout with good quality build card models.

Looking forward to more progress.

Thanks, glad you like it. Well, there's not much more to do now, (apart from adding more box files to the other end of the fiddle yard box - something which I have allowed for). I've a chimney pot to make, also some pallets and 'stores' to bring the loading platform to life, maybe a bit more clutter on the platform. But the main job now is to build my 60th birthday present from my wife, bless her! It will be just perfect for this layout!.

[rue_d_etropal]

Brierley Canal Road all packed up to take to the club this evening. Back in March, when I announced that I was going to build a box file layout, I was  branded 'a nutter' (in a friendly way). Hopefully I can change a few minds tonight!

I thought there was a 3rd box(fiddle yard?), That does not look like a boxfile in the middle. Hope nothing got damaged in transit.

[Booking Hall]

I thought there was a 3rd box(fiddle yard?), That does not look like a boxfile in the middle. Hope nothing got damaged in transit.

 

It's in there Simon, lying horizontally at the bottom of the bag. The blue box holds all the removable bits.

[Jerry1975]

Very nice birthday present you got, which reminds me, I need to start dropping hints to my wife for Christmas presents.

 

Jerry.

[rue_d_etropal]

It's in there Simon, lying horizontally at the bottom of the bag. The blue box holds all the removable bits.

I would suggest another boxfile to put other bits in, then all 4 boxes could stand up. I didn't think you would be able to fit everything in the viewable boxfiles(which is the real challenge).

As you know my layout is 3 boxes, and all scenery fits in those boxes. Another boxfile has the stock in, and another has wires and controllers. I do have tools and spares carried separately.

[Booking Hall]

I would suggest another boxfile to put other bits in, then all 4 boxes could stand up. I didn't think you would be able to fit everything in the viewable boxfiles(which is the real challenge).

As you know my layout is 3 boxes, and all scenery fits in those boxes. Another boxfile has the stock in, and another has wires and controllers. I do have tools and spares carried separately.

I did buy another box file to do that Simon, and most of the bits will fit in it, but the station canopy and flats/end backscene are to wide/tall. So this is the solution I came up with - and now I have a redundant box file to start extending the layout with! (although I could put the stock in it, I suppose . . .) I'm not concerned that I can't get everything into box files.

[rue_d_etropal]

I did buy another box file to do that Simon, and most of the bits will fit in it, but the station canopy and flats/end backscene are to wide/tall. So this is the solution I came up with - and now I have a redundant box file to start extending the layout with! (although I could put the stock in it, I suppose . . .) I'm not concerned that I can't get everything into box files.

So did not quite complete the challenge! It might be thought as minor , but facing a challenge and then completing it is even more fun.

I suppose if the canopy gets damaged a derelict canopy with a bit more damage won't look out of place.

[andyfoulger]

So did not quite complete the challenge! It might be thought as minor , but facing a challenge and then completing it is even more fun.

I suppose if the canopy gets damaged a derelict canopy with a bit more damage won't look out of place.

 

challenge ? I don't recall any mention of a challenge in Paul's posts .... Not sure that I understand the logic of damaging something that has been carefully crafted.  Having witnessed the transition from carrier-bag to layout - I'd say that the 'big' transit box fits the bill nicely... 

[rue_d_etropal]

The very idea of a boxfile layout is about fitting as much as possible into a small space and putting fixed limits beyond which you should try not to go beyond.I sometimes wonder f some don't set enough challenges for themselves.  I am not being critical of Paul's work, just saying it does not quite meet what is considered a boxfile layout, as I think set by one club a few years ago(I think Phil Parker was involved).

I know Paul, and he has seen my own boxfile layout, and I have made some positive suggestions on how to make best use of the space. I have tried various containers and materials over past 30 years, and from that know how easy things can get damaged in transit and storage.

It  is still a superb piece of modelling(although I am not a fan of printed brickwork), and hopefully will get to Padiham when it is exhibited. It captures the feel of East Lancashire circa late 60s early 70s, ie derelict and forgotten(not forgetting the wet!). .

[Booking Hall]

I didn't realise that there were some established 'norms' for box file layouts Simon. In the absence of that knowledge the challenge I set myself was to build a realistic looking railway scene that had some operating potential within the footprint and 'airspace' of two boxes. To do this I wanted to incorporate detail which, by its nature, is easily damaged and that completely precludes the storage of any of the removable bits within the scenic boxes. All, except the flats and canopy would fit in the fiddle yard box, but the plug-in transformer, controller and stock wouldn't go in as well (I'd need at least one more box for them).

 

I agree, it is a more difficult challenge arranging everything to condense into the layout boxes themselves, and to some extent (in my view anyway) that could probably only happen if finer detail was omitted (unless it was an exceptionally clever design which somehow 'interlocked' to prevent unwanted movement in transit). For me, the detail I've managed to get in is my measure of success, and, although it is set in the West Midlands (hence the predominance of brick over stone) I'm pleased that it suggests something of the dereliction, run-down-ness and grot that typified a lot of East Lancashire in the 1960s and 70s. Thinking about it now, I can see that the railway environs around Daisyfield in Blackburn, particularly the Northrop loom works which backed on to the line there, have influenced what I have built!

[rue_d_etropal]

Without checking the original challenge(I have seen references to it somewhere), I can't say more, but from what I have seeen of most ' build it in, or on' type challenges, they tend to restrict it to the actual container or footprint, plus possibly a fiddle stick for off-scene. Even then, it is fun to try and bend the rules a bit, without actually breaking them.

One reason , possibly main/original reason for my building on the box lid was to enable taller buildings to be built. Locating items so they don't clash when box is closed, is part of the fun. It is not just boxfiles, the layout I had at Pendle Forest exhibition a few years ago was built as a box which split into two halves to create layout. Getting everything to fit and not clash was tricky, but double, with no loss of detail. I am planning some more layouts using this idea, for bigger layouts as not everything I want to build will fit in a boxfile.

 

Just found the details of the 2004 challenge set by the OO gauge association

http://www.doubleogauge.com/boxfile/rules.htm

Edited October 8, 2017 by rue_d_etropal

[eastworld]

Without checking the original challenge(I have seen references to it somewhere), I can't say more, but from what I have seeen of most ' build it in, or on' type challenges, they tend to restrict it to the actual container or footprint, plus possibly a fiddle stick for off-scene. Even then, it is fun to try and bend the rules a bit, without actually breaking them.

One reason , possibly main/original reason for my building on the box lid was to enable taller buildings to be built. Locating items so they don't clash when box is closed, is part of the fun. It is not just boxfiles, the layout I had at Pendle Forest exhibition a few years ago was built as a box which split into two halves to create layout. Getting everything to fit and not clash was tricky, but double, with no loss of detail. I am planning some more layouts using this idea, for bigger layouts as not everything I want to build will fit in a boxfile.

 

Just found the details of the 2004 challenge set by the OO gauge association

http://www.doubleogauge.com/boxfile/rules.htm

Boxfile layouts have been around longer than that though. Phil Parker's previously mentioned layout for instance featured on Carl Arendt's site in 2003, and I believe that I have seen earlier ones.

 

Stu