Peco Bullhead Points: in the flesh

[davefrk]

Aren't some parts of the Severn Valley Railway concrete sleepered?

 

Dave Franks.

[unravelled]

I've got some photos taken at Thame, just after the overall roof was demolished, and it looked as if it was about to be relayed with second hand concrete sleepers.  This photo (while it lasts) shows the station after the relaying.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Thame-Railway-Station-Photo-Bledlow-Tiddington-Princes-Risborough-Line-7-/251714428244

 

Dave

[Fat Controller]

Whilst not that common, there were quite a few instances of bullhead rail on concrete sleepers. The WR seems to have used them on secondary main lines. A quick, and far from exhaustive, scan through some Ian Allan Hydraulic albums produced the following:-

page 40, Heyday of the Hymecs- Up main near Yeovil Pen Mill August 1964

Page 43, Heyday of the Warships-Down main at Tavistock, Feb 1967

These are full-length concrete sleepers.

There were others, basically two concrete blocks joined by a tie-bar, used on wartime installations.

Page 7 of 'Heyday of the Warships' shows them used on the Down Loop at Hungerford in July 1959.

Looking at photos of real-life layouts shows how seldom they are of uniform rail and sleeper types, either across or along a given areas. Main lines might have flat-bottom rail on concrete sleepers on one line on double track, whilst the other might still be bullhead on timber, dependent on the direction of the heaviest flow (this how I remember the main line near Llanelli in the 1970s, where up trains were often tankers with a 25t axle-load, whilst down trains were rarely half that. S&C was often still bullhead, long after the plain track had gone over to flat-bottom, and, even if the S&C had gone over to flat-bottom, it would still have been laid on wooden timbering until very recently. This mixing and matching of rail and sleeper types has been a feature of UK railways since the Second World War, and probably even before, yet is not seen that often in model form. Hopefully, the new range from Peco will encourage modellers to look more closely at the allegedly 'permanent' way, and model accordingly.

[Pacific231G]

Slightly
 

I've got some photos taken at Thame, just after the overall roof was demolished, and it looked as if it was about to be relayed with second hand concrete sleepers.  This photo (while it lasts) shows the station after the relaying.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Thame-Railway-Station-Photo-Bledlow-Tiddington-Princes-Risborough-Line-7-/251714428244
 
Dave

Thanks for these Dave. On A Sunday in March 1964 my school's railway society was allowed to join as passengers an Oxford University Railway Society trip to the Thame branch not too long after it had closed to passengers in 1963. This was essentially a driver experience afternoon for them with a 61xx Prairie and four coaches trundling up and down part of the branch between Morris Cowley* and Thame as OURS members took it in turns to drive. I think the seven hour trip started and ended at Oxford Station but can't be sure of that. The overall roof at Thame was definitely still in place.

Unfortunately my photos from the day, which would probably have revealed what sort of track was laid at that time, disappeared many years ago.

 

 

I have though found a retrospective on the trip on the Oxford Mail's website
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/community/memorylane/8228113.Students_got_Thame_branch_line_back_in_action/
 
A few years earlier in 1959 OURS had organised a similar jaunt on the Abingdon branch which was still open to passengers but apparently they found a two hour hole in the Saturday timetable. 

 

More generally I do remember there being quite a lot of bullhead on concrete block track in sidings around the Oxford area in the 1960s. This was in various yards both current and particularly in several closed awaiting dismantlement. I'm guessing that many of these were laid during the war as part of the general increase in capacity on routes avoiding London.
 
*The Cowley motor works, BMC when I knew it, used to have some kind of internal railway system.From what could be seen of it from outside it seemed to be one of those intriguing ones with track running along narrow alleyways between buildings. I remember seeing one of its steam locos (or possibly its one steam loco by then) lurking between buildings behind some boundary railings but have no idea what it was.

Edited February 10, 2018 by Pacific231G

[unravelled]

Slightly

 

Thanks for these Dave. On A Sunday in March 1964 my school's railway society was allowed to join as passengers an Oxford University Railway Society trip to the Thame branch not too long after it had closed to passengers in 1963. This was essentially a driver experience afternoon for them with a 61xx Prairie and four coaches trundling up and down part of the branch between Morris Cowley* and Thame as OURS members took it in turns to drive. I think the seven hour trip started and ended at Oxford Station but can't be sure of that. The overall roof at Thame was definitely still in place.

Unfortunately my photos from the day, which would probably have revealed what sort of track was laid at that time, disappeared many years ago.

 

 

I have though found a retrospective on the trip on the Oxford Mail's website

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/community/memorylane/8228113.Students_got_Thame_branch_line_back_in_action/

 

A few years earlier in 1959 OURS had organised a similar jaunt on the Abingdon branch which was still open to passengers but apparently they found a two hour hole in the Saturday timetable. 

 

More generally I do remember there being quite a lot of bullhead on concrete block track in sidings around the Oxford area in the 1960s. This was in various yards both current and particularly in several closed awaiting dismantlement. I'm guessing that many of these were laid during the war as part of the general increase in capacity on routes avoiding London.

 

*The Cowley motor works, BMC when I knew it, used to have some kind of internal railway system.From what could be seen of it from outside it seemed to be one of those intriguing ones with track running along narrow alleyways between buildings. I remember seeing one of its steam locos (or possibly its one steam loco by then) lurking between buildings behind some boundary railings but have no idea what it was.

Interesting, what school? I went on a similar OURS trip, but post demolition. To avoid going further off topic I'll post a Flickr album of it  soon.

Incidentally, one of my picture of the concrete sleepers dumped on the platform ready for laying  is on my Wylde thread.

 

Dave

[St Enodoc]

Aren't some parts of the Severn Valley Railway concrete sleepered?

 

Dave Franks.

Parts of the Bluebell certainly had bullhead rail on concrete sleepers, and may well have still.

[hayfield]

Parts of the Bluebell certainly had bullhead rail on concrete sleepers, and may well have still.

I think Bodmin General has some past the end of the platforms opposite the workshop

[Guest Anders63]

Hello!

I did ordered new Peco tracks bullhead to test it.

Right now i use Tillig elite code 83.

I did decides to test and see difference how the turnouts work and if bullhead turnouts do well work with the DCC.

I tried to search video about Peco bullhead turnout but cannot find it. 

[blueeighties]

Don'y buy all of this.

 

If the cost of materials and time were the issue:

 - If you are talking about cost of materials for production then they should be equivalent.

 - If you're talking the cost of tooling, I expect the HO tooling has been replaced many times since it was first introduced (they don't last forever) so cost of tooling material shouldn't so dissimilar.

 

To compare with C&L or Marcway is not relevant because when this was the only source it was niche. Peco bullhead will probably become main stream in this country. In the UK, there will be sales of flat bottom and maybe currently more than bullhead but I expect this is to maintain consistency with existing layout or maybe because it's cheaper, or to cover fiddle yard (also because it's cheaper). It is also likely that the demand for flatbottom HO track will reduce in the UK. Maybe future introduction of OO gauge flatbottom track will have an impact. Don't hold your breathe.

 

The time to assemble it may be an issue but with salaries being only a fraction of the overall cost, it's unlikely to affect the price by up to 30 or 40%.  

 

The overall quantity of track manufactured in HO flatbottom will be much greater because of sales in other countries, particularly the US. The only real effect this will have is that the outlay for any research, development and tooling for HO flatbottom will be recovered much quicker but because of tool life issues tooling will need replacing much more frequently.

 

Fundamentally, the cost is probably more because we are being offered "something special" (tongue firmly in cheek) and we are prepared to pay for it because we've waited so long for it.

Always great to hear comment from an expert who knows the market and manufacturing processes better than a long standing market leading manufacturer.

[RBAGE]

Always great to hear comment from an expert who knows the market and manufacturing processes better than a long standing market leading manufacturer.

Nice to be appreciated. I don't mind sharing. 

[Guest Anders63]

Will Peco bullhead accept NEM-wheels too?

It´s not only RP25 wheels?

[bertiedog]

Will Peco bullhead accept NEM-wheels too?

It´s not only RP25 wheels?

 

The Bullhead Peco point is only intolerant  to very old model wheels, the correct 14.5 mm back to back work on these. They will work with Romford, Hamblings, Jackson or equivalents in UK practice and most modern Hornby or continental NEM standards a long as the flange height is not excessive. As long as current NEM standards are observed they will run OK, but the back to back often varies on Chinese production, and must always be checked.

 

Also a lot of current RTR makers are claiming RP-25 standard when they are not. They use the max tolerances to make them, and then add in alterations like tapering the flange excessively. Few have the root radius between tyre and flange correct.

 

Stephen

[Guest Anders63]

It stands in the turnouts manual that it accept maximum 1,15 mm with the wheels flange height.

I´m not sure what NEM standard says...but i suppose it´s 1,1 mm?

[Black 5 Bear]

Has anyone run one of the Hornby Crosti 9f 's through these points with it's"Pizza Cutter" leading bogie wheels ?

[Nile]

According to NEM310 the max flange depth is 1.2mm.

 

https://www.morop.eu/downloads/nem/de/nem310_d.pdf

 

https://www.morop.eu/downloads/nem/fr/nem310_f.pdf

Edited February 16, 2018 by Nile

[bertiedog]

There should be no wheels for OO that have 2mm flanges, most are smaller, but the Chinese vary the exact dimension, and some brands do not have the same wheel standards across the range, even Hornby do this on budget legacy models.

.

Stephen.

[alfsboy]

Peco change their moulds as their code 75 has had  two different chair  styles over the years .I will buy some bullhead when mediums come out .I will also be buyiong their new code 70 US track when its available ..Funny enough I had just made a length  up using redundant   Hon3 code 70  rail slotted onto a code 83 base .

[bertiedog]

Peco Code 70 US standard gauge?.... nothing on the Peco site etc, are you sure it is not the code 70 narrow gauge track that they already supply.. Code 70 or smaller code iis near impossible to buy in the UK, so If Peco enter the market it would be very welcome.

Stephen

[mdvle]

Peco Code 70 US standard gauge?.... 

 

See http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131237-peco-code-70-ho-track/?p=3045528

[Jeff Smith]

Incredible! After all the BH advanced notice, metered info, release of flexitrack only with speculation about whether turnouts would be produced, Peco comes out with a new range all at once....... Not complaining just wondering about marketing tactics. I'm guessing these will be priced similarly to the code 83.

[The Stationmaster]

Incredible! After all the BH advanced notice, metered info, release of flexitrack only with speculation about whether turnouts would be produced, Peco comes out with a new range all at once....... Not complaining just wondering about marketing tactics. I'm guessing these will be priced similarly to the code 83.

 

The announcement of all three items for this year makes a lot of sense if you're using the points to put together a prototypical track layout because single slips were very common, double slips less so but still plenty of them about although diamond crossings were much less common in their longer form at wayside stations and branch termini.   So making a usable range available fairly quickly strikes me as a sensible approach to marketing as it will make the bullhead points and track more acceptable to a wider range of modellers.

[Bernard Lamb]

Incredible! After all the BH advanced notice, metered info, release of flexitrack only with speculation about whether turnouts would be produced, Peco comes out with a new range all at once....... Not complaining just wondering about marketing tactics. I'm guessing these will be priced similarly to the code 83.

 

It makes sense to me.

A lighter duty range for a well established market requires a reasonable range for it to be of any use.

Dipping their toes into the murky waters of nearer to scale steam era UK carries a rather greater risk.

They could have pulled the plug if the plain track did not sell in acceptable volumes. 

It would seem that they had the various options under control as points followed track and fairly quickly the other essential items were announced.

Fortunately for their bottom line and modeller's satisfaction they have the ability do be able to do that, unlike certain firms that use a far away source over which they have little control.

Bernard

[Oldddudders]

The announcement of all three items for this year makes a lot of sense if you're using the points to put together a prototypical track layout because single slips were very common, double slips less so but still plenty of them about although diamond crossings were much less common in their longer form at wayside stations and branch termini.   So making a usable range available fairly quickly strikes me as a sensible approach to marketing as it will make the bullhead points and track more acceptable to a wider range of modellers.

 

Mike - I think Jeff (note his location) was commenting on the new Code 70 track. And he's right, there had been loadsa teasing stuff about bullhead OO, before points and now other items were announced. But now we have a big single announcement of a whole range of Code 70 all in one breath. 

[Bucoops]

Much larger market in the US so less of a gamble?

[mdvle]

Mike - I think Jeff (note his location) was commenting on the new Code 70 track. And he's right, there had been loadsa teasing stuff about bullhead OO, before points and now other items were announced. But now we have a big single announcement of a whole range of Code 70 all in one breath. 

 

Also an existing market - Microengineering already do code 70 turnouts and flex.