Penmaenpool (Llyn Penmaen)

[Focalplane]

I don't know whether it's the heat or the addition of two more Dapol coaches on to the layout, but my NCE PowerCab has been getting warm lately.  I think I need the 5 amp booster because it is starting to cut out when the Lee Marsh Jubilee is running.  This is happening because I recently posted on another site how pleased I was with the way the basic PowerCab works with Gauge O locos.

 

I have looked up the item on Digitrain's site and it is out of stock at the moment.  Just as well I won't be running any trains for a couple of weeks.  Other sources seem to have higher prices which may explain why they have stock?

 

Paul

[Focalplane]

A quick email from Digitrains and I will be calling them tomorrow to see what would be the best NCE solution - there is more than one apparently.

 

Meanwhile I unboxed, again, the Minerva 8750 pannier and it liked pulling four Dapol B Set coaches up and down the circuits.  Things are coming together slowly.

 

Paul

[St Enodoc]

A quick email from Digitrains and I will be calling them tomorrow to see what would be the best NCE solution - there is more than one apparently.

 

Meanwhile I unboxed, again, the Minerva 8750 pannier and it liked pulling four Dapol B Set coaches up and down the circuits.  Things are coming together slowly.

 

Paul

Paul, it depends on your long-term aims. The ultimate solution for 0 gauge is the 10 A Power Pro system. If your locos all draw lowish current you might get away with the Power Pro 5 A system. In the meantime I suggest getting an SB5 (5 A). When your system outgrows that then get one or other of the Power Pros and use the SB5 for accessories.

[Focalplane]

Paul, it depends on your long-term aims. The ultimate solution for 0 gauge is the 10 A Power Pro system. If your locos all draw lowish current you might get away with the Power Pro 5 A system. In the meantime I suggest getting an SB5 (5 A). When your system outgrows that then get one or other of the Power Pros and use the SB5 for accessories.

Thanks, St E. Comparing prices I think it’s going to be the SB5 for now. Penmaenpool is likely to have three locos running at the most. My accessories will be powered separately. I will talk to Digitrains later on and confirm they have one in stock for delivery to the UK while I am there.

 

Paul

[Focalplane]

A little bit of forward planning for when the seasons change.  I still have some tinkering to do with the inclines of the hidden tracks before I can seriously think about the overlying scenic section, but by placing supports in appropriate places I managed to place a large sheet of 9mm ply over the top.  This is going to be a level railway datum 1.26 meters above floor level.  The ply track base will be significantly trimmed from the rectangle seen in the photos, both falling away to the estuary in the foreground and rising quickly behind the various buildings.  One photo of the track between hotel and engine shed shows that it was actually an embankment with ?swampy ground trapped roughly where the hotel car park is today.  Further west of the engine shed the line runs in a cutting, so there will actually be quite a lot of topography (it is Wales after all).

 

First an overview of the plywood:

 

 

Next a view at the level of the scenic track base, showing the hidden tracks and the 5750 class pannier with B Sets sitting on the "excursion storage loop":

 

 

I know my descriptions have been confusing at times, so these images may help dispel some of the confusion.

 

Paul

[Marshall5]

As it is still too hot to think straight (scientists' studies have demonstrated this to be true) I decided to do something fairly mundane today and punched out all the rivets on the Warren Shephard Mogul (loco only).  There are not that many to do unlike some kits.  The tender kit, on the other hand has no rivet guides though I feel sure it was heavily riveted.  So I plan to use some American HO rivet decals after the tender is built and before spraying on the etch primer.  Ironically, the decal strips look to be about the right size and having seen quite a few American prototypes I can imagine I am not far wrong in that assumption.  No decision need be made right now.  My Metalsmith riveter doesn't have guides quite like some others, so the decal strips may well end up being the better alternative for me anyway.

 

I doubt if any of the riveted parts are visible but I took a group photo of all the etches to make this post a bit more visual:

 

IMG_2131.JPG

 

There may seem to be a lot of brass here but many of the etches have redundant parts - depending on which Mogul is being modelled.

 

Paul

I'm sure you've already thought of it but it would be worth double-checking photos of your chosen mogul as I seem to remember some of their tenders were flush rivetted.  Looking forward to seeing the build.

cheers,

Ray.

[Focalplane]

I'm sure you've already thought of it but it would be worth double-checking photos of your chosen mogul as I seem to remember some of their tenders were flush rivetted.  Looking forward to seeing the build.

cheers,

Ray.

Ray, I will, that could be a blessing.

 

Thanks, Paul

[Focalplane]

I'm sure you've already thought of it but it would be worth double-checking photos of your chosen mogul as I seem to remember some of their tenders were flush rivetted.  Looking forward to seeing the build.

cheers,

Ray.

 

Well, I have done some research and all the photos I have of 5399 really don't help much - they are in publications and not at a high enough resolution.  One colour photo of a class mate at Snow Hill shows flush riveting with prominent rivets on the loco's cab side, so I went back through my published photos and there is a good chance that 5399's tender had flush riveting as the cabside rivets are visible (just) whereas the tender has no evidence of them.  Why 5399?  Because I have ordered Severn Mill plates already!

 

As noted above, though, if additional photos of 5399 are found and there are rivets in evidence, then the decals could be used.

 

Thanks, Ray!

 

Paul

[Marshall5]

5399 - an excellent choice if I might say so sir!   If I ever build one 5399 in post 1956 condition would be my choice as I remember that loco and so 'smart-Alecs' could tell me that I'd got it wrong.  As I posted in the Dapol Mogul thread 5399 was an odd man out in the class. It was, of course, built with the new style motion plate and inside steampipes and ran so through 1956 but It came out of Swindon early in 1957 with outside steampipe cylinders, an old type motion plate and long driver's side splasher!  AFAIK no other Moguls swapped motion plates (even if it is possible to do so) and my supposition is that Swindon did one of its 'identity changes' and that the loco outshopped with 5399's plates was reassembled on the frames of 5307 or 5317 which were being scrapped at the same time.The before and after pics on p50 of David Andrews' book show the changes. To add a further variation 5399 buffers were changed from the taper type to the parallel pattern a couple of years later. There is a good photo of 5399 at Barmouth (13/6/57) in 'From the Footplate Cambrian Coast Express' p101 which suggests it has a flush rivetted tender, painted black or unlined green with the large cycling lion crest. I bought a photo of 5399 at Dolgelley in 1962 and not long before withdrawal (AHB065) from Railphotoprints which may suggest that it was re-painted lined green but with the small size old crest by then.

From a modelling point of view you'd have to decide if your model is to be pre or post 5399's Feb 1957 rebuild.  If the latter then I suggest following the instructions for locos 4321-5384 with the large radius motion plate, long splasher etc but with outside steam pipes. If post 1959 then change the taper buffers to parallel type.

I've attached a scan of the page in the CCE book but if anyone objects, for copyright reasons, I'll delete it.

Hope this helps.

Ray.

Edited August 5, 2018 by Marshall5

[Focalplane]

5399 - an excellent choice if I might say so sir!   If I ever build one 5399 in post 1956 condition would be my choice as I remember that loco and so 'smart-Alecs' could tell me that I'd got it wrong.  As I posted in the Dapol Mogul thread 5399 was an odd man out in the class. It was, of course, built with the new style motion plate and inside steampipes and ran so through 1956 but It came out of Swindon early in 1957 with outside steampipe cylinders, an old type motion plate and long driver's side splasher!  AFAIK no other Moguls swapped motion plates (even if it is possible to do so) and my supposition is that Swindon did one of its 'identity changes' and that the loco outshopped with 5399's plates was reassembled on the frames of 5307 or 5317 which were being scrapped at the same time.The before and after pics on p50 of David Andrews' book show the changes. To add a further variation 5399 buffers were changed from the taper type to the parallel pattern a couple of years later. There is a good photo of 5399 at Barmouth (13/6/57) in 'From the Footplate Cambrian Coast Express' p101 which suggests it has a flush rivetted tender, painted black or unlined green with the large cycling lion crest. I bought a photo of 5399 at Dolgelley in 1962 and not long before withdrawal (AHB065) from Railphotoprints which may suggest that it was re-painted lined green but with the small size old crest by then.

From a modelling point of view you'd have to decide if your model is to be pre or post 5399's Feb 1957 rebuild.  If the latter then I suggest following the instructions for locos 4321-5384 with the large radius motion plate, long splasher etc but with outside steam pipes. If post 1959 then change the taper buffers to parallel type.

I've attached a scan of the page in the CCE book but if anyone objects, for copyright reasons, I'll delete it.

Hope this helps.

Ray.

 

Wow, wow, wow!

 

Thank you Ray!  I am thrilled to receive so much information.  It will be post 1956, so now I need to assimilate all this information while away from the railway room.  I forgot to look at David Andrews' book, blame it on la canicule which shows no signs of abating until after I leave France.

 

Paul

 

Edit, the photos are on page 52!  By the way I spoke with David Andrews last week and he said he really enjoyed writing the book and would have done others but the kit business took off.  The rest is history.

Edited August 5, 2018 by Focalplane

[Focalplane]

The heatwave continues so I have spent much of the day in the railway room - with the air-conditioning on.  At first I did a few small things, but that large sheet of plywood where the station will be had me thinking.  The scissor crossing is a module, so the two points and a catch point at the western end of the loop would also make a good drop in module, as will the two points leading to the shed roads, but that will be another time.

 

First I cut and trimmed the pointwork and used some butadone to help to keep the track together at just a few sleepers where they touch.  This created more stability than I thought possible.  The fishplates are in place and the track looks like this:

 

 

Next I placed the pointwork roughly where it will be located (within 5 cm accuracy):

 

 

The level crossing leading to the toll bridge is actually where the western point is located, so the station house would be just to the right of the photo.

 

The catch point protects the single siding to the yard.

 

The second point is where the station platforms begin.  They are offset, the UP platform (on the left) being to the west, the DOWN platform to the east.  In reality the loop curved slightly to the right towards Dolgelley but space constraints force the platforms and loop to bend to the left.  The yard siding will also bend to the left, adjacent to the DOWN platform fence.

 

I have now cut the base for the pointwork and drilled the necessary holes.  I may go back down this evening and trim some cork sheet but this will also mean referencing the various photos and maps so I may only mark it out.

 

A satisfying day after all!

 

Paul

[Focalplane]

Actually, the prototype was different but compression had forced me to rearrange the points. I don’t like this but I have to fit in the key buildings, etc. along the back wall of the room. Perhaps I will leave it for now and come back fresh with a better idea in a month’s time.

 

But still satisfying to have started on the scenic level.

 

Paul

[Focalplane]

OK, while I cook dinner I am uploading and editing a photo showing the alternatives.  Prototype at top, my version below.

 

 

The prototype has the western point controlling the loop.  A second point before the DOWN platform gives access to the yard.  This point is protected by the catch point, located further east.  The level crossing passes between the two points, shown by the steel ruler.  The green pencil shows the location of the signal box.

 

This actually gives a potentially longer passing loop as the loop is already established at the signal box.  But this is at the expense of the heavily compressed single line section between the toll bridge and the engine shed turnout in which the station building and the hotel must be represented.

 

My version simply compresses the pointwork such that the yard siding is switched from the western point and the loop doesn't begin until the second point.  The pencil shows where I might place the signal box.  Again the steel rule represents the level crossing.

 

As the platforms are now on a 6ft radius curve the prototype is already moot.

 

Any ideas, opinions, etc.?

 

Paul

[St Enodoc]

OK, while I cook dinner I am uploading and editing a photo showing the alternatives.  Prototype at top, my version below.

 

IMG_2470.JPG

 

The prototype has the western point controlling the loop.  A second point before the DOWN platform gives access to the yard.  This point is protected by the catch point, located further east.  The level crossing passes between the two points, shown by the steel ruler.  The green pencil shows the location of the signal box.

 

This actually gives a potentially longer passing loop as the loop is already established at the signal box.  But this is at the expense of the heavily compressed single line section between the toll bridge and the engine shed turnout in which the station building and the hotel must be represented.

 

My version simply compresses the pointwork such that the yard siding is switched from the western point and the loop doesn't begin until the second point.  The pencil shows where I might place the signal box.  Again the steel rule represents the level crossing.

 

As the platforms are now on a 6ft radius curve the prototype is already moot.

 

Any ideas, opinions, etc.?

 

Paul

Paul, I think that all you need to do is to evaluate the trade-off between the scenic length, as you've mentioned, and the length of the loop itself.

 

Oh, and get rid of those odd-looking 'dog-leg' timbers on the Peco points...

[N15class]

As long as the loop is long enough to take the longest train necessary the layout of the point work is not critical. The main thing is, are you able to live with the alterations to the point work.

[Andrew P]

Paul,

 

Oh, and get rid of those odd-looking 'dog-leg' timbers on the Peco points...

I modified mine as below, using ordinary sleepers with some Chairs cut away to allow the Blade to move.

 

[Focalplane]

Thank you both for your input. Aesthetically I think I should follow the prototype track layout because:

 

1. The offset platforms will look right

2. The signal box was located on the platform

3. There should be less pointwork at the road crossing

4. In the prototype the western point is actually in front of the station building, so there should still be room for the hotel and embankment before the shed turnout

 

And finally

 

5. I think it is important from an operational point of view to replicate the signal box lever positions on the control panel.

 

But I am not going to make a decision just yet. I will be visiting Penmaenpool again very soon and this may help to confirm the best way forward.

 

Any further comments would be most welcome!

 

Paul

[Simond]

Paul,

 

I think your five reasons are unlikely to be overwhelmed by any argument except necessity...

 

Best

Simon

[Focalplane]

Well, one last thought before I leave.  I needed to see the "big picture" so cut a long piece of ply which will probably now be the "module" that holds the points, and would also be the base for several buildings (mainly station house and hotel but other huts as well).

 

I have temporarily laid out the prototype track layout either side of the toll bridge level crossing and with the platform loop extending round the corner with enough space to allow two 4 coach trains to pass, the compression is not too bad at all!

 

Several photos to demonstrate my latest thoughts.  The first is a view looking southeast from above the estuary:

 

 

Next, looking southwest from above the platform area:

 

 

Details showing the level crossing (plywood piece) and the signal box and toll house, both of which are on stilts on the bank to the estuary, as well as a line of small huts in the goods yard.  The small goods shed will be off to the east, beyond the catch point.

 

 

Last, the view along the embankment from the signal box area, showing the station building, then the hotel and off in the distance another piece of white paper represents the engine shed area.

 

 

I am hoping this will work well and will not be too cluttered.  Here are some reference photos to support the above:

 

View from the toll bridge (only part of which will be modelled)

 

 

View of the track bed from the hotel (note it is at an angle from the embankment, no doubt because it pre-dated the railway)

 

 

The hotel (the glassed in area nearest the camera is new and will not be modelled)

 

 

The station building on the right, the toll house on the left (the station house has been extended by the hotel owners to provide a larger annexe)

 

 

A similar view but from further away, showing the hotel and the faux-signal

 

 

Paul

 

 

 

 

 

[bgman]

Hi Paul,

 

Probably the best way would be to make up some temporary card / paper buildings and have a play around to get and overall impression of what you want to achieve. I always thought it was a bit of a faf but I think it helps when doing your initial planning.

 

Grahame

[bgman]

Although my very small proposed layout is still at the planning stage I've laid out some track and a few buildings etc to help make up my mind.

 

It's certainly given me more ideas and is probably the third / fourth/ fifth I've gone through but generally getting settled now.

 

Due to space restrictions I decided to have a "generic" as opposed to real location ( bah! ) but at least I'll be able to play with my stock.

 

 

 

 

 

There may well be some front and rear scenic "add on" modules to get a better depth of field eventually.

Apologies for posting on your thread but it's merely to show that having a play with buildings or even mock up card can help greatly I feel.

 

Grahame

[Focalplane]

Although my very small proposed layout is still at the planning stage I've laid out some track and a few buildings etc to help make up my mind.

It's certainly given me more ideas and is probably the third / fourth/ fifth I've gone through but generally getting settled now.

Due to space restrictions I decided to have a "generic" as opposed to real location ( bah! ) but at least I'll be able to play with my stock.

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

There may well be some front and rear scenic "add on" modules to get a better depth of field eventually.

Apologies for posting on your thread but it's merely to show that having a play with buildings or even mock up card can help greatly I feel.

Grahame

Post away, Grahame, you are most welcome!

[bgman]

Thank you Paul.

 

My reasoning behind the above is that having built some pointwork already and with a possible move next year I needed a minimum-ish small space layout but utilising what I had got.

I'm sure others may come up with different thoughts and ideas but the main consideration was not knowing where I will be and house size. I think the two 1.5 x 600mm boards plus a small fiddly diddly yard would be ok so that's where I am currently.

 

I am still looking to purchase the 43xx as you have done, and I'm certain that I will, it will be of real interest to see how you get on with the build and hope you'll post your findings here.

 

My locos are of the smaller size, 2 Panniers and a Dean Goods ( Warren Shepards kit ) with the smaller tender so as to fit better on this layout. All this pre-planning can be both a blessing and a pain !

 

Cheers

 

Grahame

[Focalplane]

Thank you Paul.

My reasoning behind the above is that having built some pointwork already and with a possible move next year I needed a minimum-ish small space layout but utilising what I had got.

I'm sure others may come up with different thoughts and ideas but the main consideration was not knowing where I will be and house size. I think the two 1.5 x 600mm boards plus a small fiddly diddly yard would be ok so that's where I am currently.

I am still looking to purchase the 43xx as you have done, and I'm certain that I will, it will be of real interest to see how you get on with the build and hope you'll post your findings here.

My locos are of the smaller size, 2 Panniers and a Dean Goods ( Warren Shepards kit ) with the smaller tender so as to fit better on this layout. All this pre-planning can be both a blessing and a pain !

Cheers

Grahame

Grahame

 

My Legge Lane layout was a stop gap 2.4m x 0.6m layout that I could live with in a small apartment. Lots of learning experiences I am now putting to good use, though I still value others’ advice and experience - and always will!

 

Ironically, it looks as though I won’t be using the turntable from Legge Lane.

 

I am hoping to get all the add ons for both the Mogul and the Dukedog kits and they will be kit building priorities this coming winter. I will probably chronicle the builds on this thread and not my workbench topic.

 

Paul

[Focalplane]

Now within an hour’s drive of Penmaenpool and it’ started raining! This morning the sun was shining and I was towel holder while my better half swam in the bay at Borth y Gest - it was high tide! The rest of the family just texted that they are back at Rhyddu after a successful climb up Snowdon so another achievement has been logged on the family atchives.

 

As to railway modelling, I hope to visit Penmaenpool before long and hopefully sort out the balance between buildings, etc. then there is Guildex at Telford to consider. It does look like I will be there on the Saturday but not the Sunday.

 

I have also received the NCE 5 amp booster. It’s smaller and lighter than I thought it would be. In the box was the second item ordered, the USB accessory that should mean that I will be able to control the trains using my iPad Mini. More technology to understand and assimilate.

 

Talking of which, my new car has some interesting technical gadgets, including automatic headlamp dimming and nudging the steering wheel if you begin to stray off the autoroute lane. This even worked in the Cotswolds, but only where the roads had discernible white lines, but as they haven’t been repainted in years that technology isn’t quite perfect. I also noted that after about 2 hours driving the Sat Nav suggested it might be time to stop for a rest! I am not entirely convinced that these gadgets are good but it’s the future and fortunately they can be turned off.

 

Paul