Re-starting in American HO

[Keith Addenbrooke]

This post could be entitled: “a man with much to learn still…”

 

1.  When I began my grain elevator build back in April, @Oldddudders flagged up the way the window frames are moulded as part of the glazing sheet - making painting them rather delicate.  Although I painted them shortly after I started, I’ve put off the job of tidying them up.  Time to bite the bullet:

 

 

Not that great, but hopefully good enough.  I used a craft knife to remove excess paint, but didn’t worry if I scratched the  glazing, as this a well used industrial building.  There are some gaps in the paint now, which I hope will just look like weathering (fortunately, the windows are quite small).  Not the best job ever, especially for a tall building I want to be front and centre (at least some of the time).

 

2.  I’m also still having trouble with the Alaska Railroad Boxcar that had a loose weight.  Having thought I’d stuck it back down successfully, instead I heard a familiar “clunk” when I was boxing it up again after posing it for some photos (15th Sept post above).  It had come loose again.  Without thinking I boxed it up and put it back in the storage crate for another day - failing to realise that a week on its side would give ample time for the still-tacky glue to set firm to the side of the car.

 

Thankfully I’ve managed to shake it loose and it is now able to stand upright again.  Whether the weight inside is glue-side up or down I have no way of knowing short of leaving it to stand for another week.

 

I was recounting my tale of woe to a fellow modeller last Saturday and they suggested I could have used a different approach altogether (and not broken the roof).  If I’d simply drilled a couple of holes in the bottom of the car (from underneath) I could have dripped in some superglue and left the weight to stick itself.  Why didn’t I think of that?  I’ve not decided if I’ll do it now, or if I’ll just make a bad job worse.

 

3.  Next up, I’ve discovered why I should have glued together the concrete grain silos before painting them - anyone tell the difference between the box photo and my model:

 

 

While the component parts for the silos are cleverly overlapped, there is still a very visible line, even when the parts fit properly.  Again, for a planned centrepiece model it’s not good enough.  I tried running a bead of glue ’n’ glaze as a filler before repainting those sections:

 

 

 

Trouble is, as an inexperience spray painter, I so overdid the extra coat (both too much and too close) I discovered after I finished that I’d actually managed to get spray paint to run (at the far end to the one I was working from):

 

 

And of course this side is the very visible top.  It’s now on the workbench for a do-over, and I’m clearly in need of a lot more practice with rattle cans.

 

As I’ve also got a Narrow Gauge deadline in just over a month, I’m thinking I should finish rescuing the silos, then put it all to one side again before I do any more American HO damage!  And just when it seemed to be going so well…🤣, Keith.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

A VERY big lightbulb moment: 

 

I've come across this blog by Lance Mindheim from earlier in the year, and for me it is just perfect - finally, a concise summary of why I have so often made no real progress before a new idea takes over!  There is now a VERY big lightbulb shining brightly above my head!!  Certainly worth a read:

 

Defining Model Railroad Design Success (January 15, 2023)

 

If I may quote two central phrases that have really jumped out at me:

 

"...there is what they “think” is the absolute bare minimum scope they need in order to motivate them to build something/anything. On the other side of balance is their actual level of time/energy/focus level. The problem is the two don’t match..." 

 

"...understanding how to be satisfied with less.  Less doesn't mean less sophisticated and it doesn't mean "settling"..."

 

Just a few words from quite a short blog entry by an experienced modeller and layout designer that in truth could probably have saved me a large proportion of the 2,400+ posts I've made here on RMweb over the past five years (including my own complete two-series blog!!!). 

 

Perhaps I should send it round to everyone who has helped me all the different ideas I've explored with a heartfelt apology? I may now finally get it!

 

Definitely some food for thought, Keith.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Grain Elevator build - back on course

 

The HO scale Walthers Concrete Grain Elevator kit has been top of the list of structures I want to build every year for at least the past four years, so I wasn’t best pleased with myself after my post / confession on Thursday that showed I was starting to make a mess of it.  I don’t claim (and never will claim) to be an expert modeller, but even I know when I can do better.  So…

 

I slowed myself down, took a few deep breaths, and with some free time yesterday tackled the silos again (more carefully).  

 

As well as botching the re-paint, I’d chosen the wrong solution for the gaps where the pieces join.  I’d tried glue ‘n’ glaze as a filler, and when first applied I thought it had looked promising (it has proved useful on other kits I’ve made).  

 

The first layer however wasn’t deep enough and gaps still showed after re-painting:

 

 

So a second layer was then added:

 

 

But this had turned out to be difficult to sand down neatly.

 

So yesterday I scraped out the glue ‘n’ glaze and replaced it with Polyfilla instead (I found an old but unopened tube in a cupboard).  I’m not sure I’d recommend Polyfilla for modelling, but I was confident it would work!  I spread my modelling out across the day, giving each join plenty of time to cure before sanding.

 

[Sanding Polyfilla does release potentially toxic dust, so this was done with the window open, and the modelling room was cleaned, vacuumed and the bin emptied when I’d finished for the day].

 

After sanding it looked much smoother, though some of the original grey primer was also starting to show again:

 

 

After re-painting again it was looking better:

 

 

Nearly there.  Some more gentle sanding and then what I hope will be a final layer of paint to finish (it’s in the outhouse to dry overnight).  It won’t be a perfect job by any means, but will hopefully be at least adequate now.

 

The drying time each section needed gave me the opportunity to fit the windows into the elevator walls:

 

 

These do look good enough for me, so I then cleaned the edges of each wall from any paint drips or oversprays and glued the elevator together:

 

 

At 13” tall the kit nicely dominates the covered hopper, even though I think this is quite a small elevator by prototype standards (it scales to 94’3”).  It does give the sense of presence I was hoping for - this aerial shot almost looks N-Scale:

 

 

Still a lot to do, but I’m more satisfied now with how it’s going, and with how having this built will help me visualise a small layout design.  Have a good week, Keith.

 

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Video with a prototype (night-time) backscene idea for an Alaska Railroad Layout:

 

 

Keith.

[AndyB]

On 23/09/2023 at 18:28, Keith Addenbrooke said:

...

Defining Model Railroad Design Success (January 15, 2023)

...

Perhaps I should send it round to everyone who has helped me all the different ideas I've explored with a heartfelt apology? I may now finally get it!

 

Definitely some food for thought, Keith.

 

 

Food for thought, indeed. And not just in our modelling, perhaps.

 

There's a second very interesting post in Lance's blog about the consequences of actually finishing a layout where he touches on ticking jobs off.  And before you know it you've got to the end and have a big hole in your hobby life.

I'm certainly guilty of checklist-style builds. 

1. Great, the baseboards are done.

2. Phew, the track is down.

3. Thank goodness the wiring is finished.

4. Oh, good grief...ballasting.

 

When I write it like that you might ask if there's any bit of the hobby I actually do like. Lol 

 

So on my current build I'm taking a somewhat relaxed pace and taking pleasure in mundane tasks, such as thinking through a wiring loom, neatly soldering connectors, labelling every wire...

 

More importantly it's really good to see you settled on an idea and making good progress. 👍 

Edited September 28, 2023 by AndyB

[Keith Addenbrooke]

2 hours ago, AndyB said:

 

 

Food for thought, indeed. And not just in our modelling, perhaps.

 

There's a second very interesting post in Lance's blog about the consequences of actually finishing a layout where he touches on ticking jobs off.  And before you know it you've got to the end and have a big hole in your hobby life.

I'm certainly guilty of checklist-style builds. 

1. Great, the baseboards are done.

2. Phew, the track is down.

3. Thank goodness the wiring is finished.

4. Oh, good grief...ballasting.

 

When I write it like that you might ask if there's any bit of the hobby I actually do like. Lol 

 

So on my current build I'm taking a somewhat relaxed pace and taking pleasure in mundane tasks, such as thinking through a wiring loom, neatly soldering connectors, labelling every wire...

 

More importantly it's really good to see you settled on an idea and making good progress. 👍 

 

Thanks Andy.  In an older blog post from 2015, Lance Mindheim mentions a questionnaire he uses with his clients to determine which aspects of the hobby they most enjoy - and which they least enjoy.

 

Apparently, structure building comes out top, while wiring comes out at the bottom (both consistently).

 

This means I’m actually normal…!

 

(Thank you for your kind words about me being finally settled, I think the key is that I’ve really settled on two ideas: one for Narrow Gauge and one Standard Gauge.  They complement but don’t compete with each other - that’s the breakthrough).

[woodenhead]

I think that the number of people who really develop their model railways to a point they are happy with is quite small and most of us reach plateaux where we either stop or start again, it is knowing how to push on at the plateaux that proves the breakthrough moment.

 

I've been struggling to get my own effort moving forward, trying different angles of attack but I've come back to the original idea and now have a new mountain to climb but at least I know I am on the right mountain.  However, I am retaining the right to expose myself to some other hills that I can model upon be it another N or a small OO one.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Free time this evening has given me the chance to glue together the covered loading bays for the grain elevator.  They’ll be weathered before I glue them in place:

 

 

Inevitably I posed a couple of shots with a loco and my covered hoppers:

 

 

 

With a car length of around 8”, two feet are needed for three car spots - but that only gives capacity for two cars in the spur, as they would be pulled through when loading (either by the road switcher or an on-site Trackmobile).  It’s unlikely that a fleet of just six cars would be quite so diverse - it’s obviously easier at the elevator if all cars are the same type.  These just happen to be the ones I have.

 

When time came to pack these away I noticed another car had a loose weight inside (one of the NP hoppers - it also had a loose hatch).  It seems to be an occupational hazard of buying second-hand rolling stock.  After a couple of false starts however (I didn’t need to remove the coupler or the truck) I noticed the roof is a separate moulding:

 

 

 

 

The screw on the left is the one that had come loose.  It was holding both the two weights in place and the hatch cover (very smart).  The only spare screw I had to hand (on the right) had too fine a thread, so I re-used the original even though it is a bit worn.  It does appear to be holding, at least for now.

 

Measuring up the car spots for the elevator set me thinking about the other industries I have kits / cars for.  I have an oil dealer and four 21,000 gallon tank cars.  At least two of the tank cars are insulated for hot products (eg: tar) and by my period tank cars would already be much longer, but these will give me a compact option for switching, at least to start:

 

 

To show how many parts come in a kit, I laid out the sprues from just one kit (for the D-X car).  They won’t be quick builds!

 

Earlier in the thread there was discussion about covered 2-bay hoppers needing a simple transload spur (like a team track), so these three can serve another industry (which doesn’t need to any real space):

 

 

 All good so far.  The problem I have is when it comes to box cars - as well as the six here I have another fifteen or so (some refrigerated and a mix of 40’, 50’ and 60’ cars):

 

 

 

Tops of my list for another structure is therefore another boxcar industry - ideally one with more than one specific car spot.  A useful exercise to keep me heading in the right direction when it comes to planning (making best use of what I have).  Have a good weekend, Keith.

 

 

Edited September 28, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Keith Addenbrooke]

With Autumn arriving my outdoor baseboard factory will close soon for the winter, so it was nice to get into the garden this week and add ends and basic bracing to the baseboards, something I wasn’t able to complete last time I worked on them.

 

I tackled the staging yard board first, adding bracing either side of the central join in the board:

 

 

I drilled a couple of holes to let wiring through when the time comes, using the larger drill bit that came with a DCC Concepts Baseboard Dowel set.  To get a clean cut I clamped a spare piece of plywood behind the hole I was drilling, and this did seem to stop the wood from splitting.

 

The other three baseboards were next - these are identical.  I hadn’t had time to add ends last time, so did that first:

 

 

I then added a short piece of bracing at one end of each board.  It simply bridges the join.  I’ll need to decide if more bracing is needed - I have enough wood left over.  The trade off is greater weight (they feel stable as they are, but will they warp?).

 

I need to fit the baseboard joining dowels and tidy up the paint in places, but these could now come inside for track planning, which was part of my thinking anyway, Keith.

 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

With free time yesterday but rain preventing any outdoor activity except essential shopping, I dipped into my stock box for an Athearn blue box freight car kit to try instead.  The Athearn blue box range was almost legendary amongst American outline HO modellers, and while I have several to build, I’d not actually assembled one before.  So what’s it all about? 

 

The one that won my lucky dip was this GN Caboose kit.  These part-built kits come ready painted, which is a huge boost for someone like me, but still gives the opportunity for something a bit more than r-t-r:

 

 

The contents of the bits envelope.  I don’t know how old this kit is as I picked it up pre-owned for just a few pounds, but the horn hook couplers are a giveaway:

 

 

First task therefore was to fit a couple of Kadee couplers instead.  I took the suggestion from @BR60103 (Sept 15th post, previous page) and threaded some fine cotton through the couplers springs so I couldn’t lose them:

 

 

The spring is then fitted and the thread pulled free:

 

 

While care is needed not to ‘ping’ the spring when threading the cotton, I found it helped keep the springs in shape.  Not only was I able to avoid any losses, but I found they also pushed into place more easily too.  Thanks for the tip!

 

One thing these kits don’t come with are glazing sheets - in fact none of the six cabooses I have came with glazed windows.  I had a sheet of clear acetate in stock, so it didn’t take long to add some plastic windows using glue ‘n’ glaze:

 

 

The single sheet of cutaway instructions (first photo) confused me at first as I couldn’t see what would hold the screws keeping the coupler pockets and sub-frame (one pair) and trucks (two more) in place.  Eventually I realised they screw up into the metal weight to hold that in place too.  Given the problems I’ve been having with truck weights, to have two screws at each end should be good news for me with this one:

 

 

Less happily, this is another car where the replacement Kadee couplers are a bit too high.  Is it a common problem with older freight car models and kits, I wonder?

 

 

One of the holes needed to keep the end hand rails in place was missing, but fortunately I have a drill bit small enough for the job.  The metal handrails and ladders have been superglued in place.  One of the plastic brakewheels broke while being added, possibly a result of the plastic becoming a bit more brittle after years in storage.  Other than that it all went together nicely and I’m happy with the result:

 

 

I’d rather have spent the time playing trains operating a layout if I’m completely honest, but this quick build is still an encouragement to press on and great value for money.  Have a good week.  Keith. 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke

[2E Sub Shed]

On 28/09/2023 at 21:10, Keith Addenbrooke said:

 

 

With a car length of around 8”, two feet are needed for three car spots - but that only gives capacity for two cars in the spur, as they would be pulled through when loading (either by the road switcher or an on-site Trackmobile).  It’s unlikely that a fleet of just six cars would be quite so diverse - it’s obviously easier at the elevator if all cars are the same type.  These just happen to be the ones I have.

 

 

 

Dependent on period, box cars were used for grain, so 40 ft box cars would be prototypical.

 

Also, in addition to the methods of moving cars, add electric winch, possibly more likely at a small facility. 

[2E Sub Shed]

4 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Less happily, this is another car where the replacement Kadee couplers are a bit too high.  Is it a common problem with older freight car models and kits, I wonder?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I keep a few Kadee "Underset" & "Overset" couplers to cope with these situations.

 

[NBL]

5 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

With free time yesterday but rain preventing any outdoor activity except essential shopping, I dipped into my stock box for an Athearn blue box freight car kit to try instead.  The Athearn blue box range was almost legendary amongst American outline HO modellers, and while I have several to build, I’d not actually assembled one before.  So what’s it all about? 

 

The one that won my lucky dip was this GN Caboose kit.  These part-built kits come ready painted, which is a huge boost for someone like me, but still gives the opportunity for something a bit more than r-t-r:

 

 

The contents of the bits envelope.  I don’t know how old this kit is as I picked it up pre-owned for just a few pounds, but the horn hook couplers are a giveaway:

 

 

First task therefore was to fit a couple of Kadee couplers instead.  I took the suggestion from @BR60103 (Sept 15th post, previous page) and threaded some fine cotton through the couplers springs so I couldn’t lose them:

 

 

The spring is then fitted and the thread pulled free:

 

 

While care is needed not to ‘ping’ the spring when threading the cotton, I found it helped keep the springs in shape.  Not only was I able to avoid any losses, but I found they also pushed into place more easily too.  Thanks for the tip!

 

One thing these kits don’t come with are glazing sheets - in fact none of the six cabooses I have came with glazed windows.  I had a sheet of clear acetate in stock, so it didn’t take long to add some plastic windows using glue ‘n’ glaze:

 

 

The single sheet of cutaway instructions (first photo) confused me at first as I couldn’t see what would hold the screws keeping the coupler pockets and sub-frame (one pair) and trucks (two more) in place.  Eventually I realised they screw up into the metal weight to hold that in place too.  Given the problems I’ve been having with truck weights, to have two screws at each end should be good news for me with this one:

 

 

Less happily, this is another car where the replacement Kadee couplers are a bit too high.  Is it a common problem with older freight car models and kits, I wonder?

 

 

One of the holes needed to keep the end hand rails in place was missing, but fortunately I have a drill bit small enough for the job.  The metal handrails and ladders have been superglued in place.  One of the plastic brakewheels broke while being added, possibly a result of the plastic becoming a bit more brittle after years in storage.  Other than that it all went together nicely and I’m happy with the result:

 

 

I’d rather have spent the time playing trains operating a layout if I’m completely honest, but this quick build is still an encouragement to press on and great value for money.  Have a good week.  Keith. 

 

 

It looks like the end step is curving upwards which raises the height of the coupler box, try sitting it in warm water and manipulating it level.

 

Also check that the coupler isn't sagging on the loco.  Do you have a kadee coupler height tool, if not these are essential for trouble free operation.

 

I love the US shake the box kits, I replace the wheels with metal ones, give them a weather and that's it!  Great value when new, even better now they are OOP

[BR60103]

I haven't done any Athearn kits for quite a few years.  This coupler mounting is different to any that I've used.

In the 50s, the cover of the pocket was mounted with a screw in the middle the went through the boss that the coupler pivoted on.  It never went up into the weight.

Later they used a sheet metal cover that was U shaped and clipped onto a couple of projections on the side of the plastic box.  This could, under strain, shear the projections off and never work again.

Modellers who couldn't get Kadee height gauges used Athearn cars as standards.

I recently bought a kit to drill and tap a hole in the boss that the coupler pivots on. This lets you screw the coupler box lid on. (Is it a lid if it goes on the bottom?)

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Thanks to all for the responses and encouragement.  I’ve had a look at some of the suggestions as follows:

 

On 28/09/2023 at 15:59, woodenhead said:

I think that the number of people who really develop their model railways to a point they are happy with is quite small and most of us reach plateaux where we either stop or start again, it is knowing how to push on at the plateaux that proves the breakthrough moment.

 

Very, very true - my problem for the past three and a half years has been continually going back and starting again has been when I’ve just completed a set of baseboards, but got no further (for a variety of reasons).  I do now have a clear strategy for pushing on past this stage.  Although I don’t yet have a layout design for this project, the ideas I’m exploring are achievable.

 

14 hours ago, 2E Sub Shed said:

Dependent on period, box cars were used for grain, so 40 ft box cars would be prototypical.

 

Also, in addition to the methods of moving cars, add electric winch, possibly more likely at a small facility. 

 

Good point  I think this CB&Q box car is the only one of those I currently have.  Note, the model says it was built new in December 1968, which would make it a newer car than some grain hoppers:

 

 

 

14 hours ago, 2E Sub Shed said:

I keep a few Kadee "Underset" & "Overset" couplers to cope with these situations.

 

 

Good plan.  As I’m just getting started with coupler conversions, I’m thinking I’ll get a few more cars built / converted to see how many sets I need to buy before ordering any.

 

13 hours ago, NBL said:

It looks like the end step is curving upwards which raises the height of the coupler box, try sitting it in warm water and manipulating it level.

 

Also check that the coupler isn't sagging on the loco.  Do you have a kadee coupler height tool, if not these are essential for trouble free operation.

 

I love the US shake the box kits, I replace the wheels with metal ones, give them a weather and that's it!  Great value when new, even better now they are OOP

 

Full marks - on closer inspection there is a slight ‘bow’ (at both ends) which I didn’t spot when assembling the kit - visible here:

 

 

I also noticed the coupler pocket at one end wasn’t quite clipped in perfectly either:

 

 

This has now been fixed - well spotted!  

 

As for buying a coupler height gauge, I’ve read different opinions on whether they’re value for money.  My thinking with only around 50 freight cars (at the moment) is to see how much variation I actually have to manage - if there is quite a range, a standard height tool may well make it onto my shopping list.  

 

10 hours ago, BR60103 said:

I haven't done any Athearn kits for quite a few years.  This coupler mounting is different to any that I've used.

In the 50s, the cover of the pocket was mounted with a screw in the middle the went through the boss that the coupler pivoted on.  It never went up into the weight.

Later they used a sheet metal cover that was U shaped and clipped onto a couple of projections on the side of the plastic box.  This could, under strain, shear the projections off and never work again.

Modellers who couldn't get Kadee height gauges used Athearn cars as standards.

I recently bought a kit to drill and tap a hole in the boss that the coupler pivots on. This lets you screw the coupler box lid on. (Is it a lid if it goes on the bottom?)

 

Good advice - one of the projections on my Alaska RR caboose has suffered the effects of removing and replacing the metal cover.  Hopefully the close up photo above shows the arrangement on this GN caboose quite clearly - the fixing screw is behind the coupler (so it comes up inside the body, not on the end platform).  It means the coupler box is not a separate moulding - the cover is part of the single piece sub-frame.  Here are two more examples I’ve not yet assembled - while they are different to each other, both have the coupler pocket as part of the main floor moulding.

 

 

I’m quite happy with metal axles incidentally, as I’m planning on manual uncoupling rather than magnetic.

 

All good fun.  have a good week, Keith.

[2E Sub Shed]

1 hour ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

As for buying a coupler height gauge, I’ve read different opinions on whether they’re value for money.  My thinking with only around 50 freight cars (at the moment) is to see how much variation I actually have to manage - if there is quite a range, a standard height tool may well make it onto my shopping list.  

 

I’m quite happy with metal axles incidentally, as I’m planning on manual uncoupling rather than magnetic.

 

 

Coupler Height Gauge - As long as all your stock is at the same height no issue, you can use one car as the "standard" and reference to that. However using the Kadde gauge, you can determine who is following the recommended height   A pair (i,e, one) trip pin pliers is of use where you need to tweak the height of the trip pin, although if not using magnetic uncoulpling some users remove them.

 

Metal Axles ; Issue is not the metal axles, more the plastic wheels in terms of track cleanliness. 

[doctor quinn]

21 hours ago, 2E Sub Shed said:

 

 

I keep a few Kadee "Underset" & "Overset" couplers to cope with these situations.

 

Check if the steel weight is flat, I've had a few blue box cars where the weight is bent and pulls the coupler boxes up.

[Nick_Burman]

@Keith Addenbrooke, swap the bogies on the caboose with those on the Burlington boxcar as these are caboose bogies.

 

Cheers NB

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Thanks to @doctor quinn and @Nick_Burman for the pointers above - useful advice not just for this simple kit but also things to check when I tackle more the more complicated kits I have.  I have a reference book that includes details of  Passenger Car trucks, but not freight trucks, so my knowledge is very limited on such matters.  The help is appreciated.

 

In other news, this has come - I ordered it to give me more spots for boxcar loads:

 

 

Yes, I should probably have bought a set of loading doors - which Walthers do sell as a separate kit - and scratchbuilt the rest.  By the time I’d factored in the cost of the styrene I’d need for the corrugated sections and the brick foundations (my stock is very minimal) I took the easy way out, and this is a background building I’ve fancied for a while.  While it is very plain, that actually gives me the additional flexibility I’m looking for, plus it’s not too modern for my era.

 

The bad news is that this one goes away until my birthday (which is not in October).

 

However, it means I have an updated list for layout planning of car destinations I have structures in stock for:

 

1.  Grain Elevator (to be removed when running in Alaska RR mode)

2.  Fuel Oil Distributor

3.  Low relief industry building

4.  Low relief shipping company warehouse

5.  Transload / team track spur (no building needed - possible a small office?)

6.  Depot

 

Earlier in this thread I was looking to include other structures / car destinations as well but it was getting too crowded for my space.  I‘ve also dispensed with the idea of including an interchange siding on the list, as the ARR didn’t have any.  While it is rather a “Walthersville” list, I like their kits.  As the ones I’ve got are all fairly generic, I’m hoping it’ll be how I use them that will make a difference, Keith.

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke

[AndyB]

57 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

...While it is rather a “Walthersville” list, I like their kits.  As the ones I’ve got are all fairly generic, I’m hoping it’ll be how I use them that will make a difference, Keith.

 

 

There's something to be said for using similar kits. Or, rather, kits using similar materials; it lends consistency, I think. 

You can certainly make "your" Walthersville distinct from others by the way you paint paint and weather them. You'll have great fun on that bit, I'm sure! 

 

[BR60103]

I'm glad to hear you're keeping the uncoupling pins. On one layout I operated on, we used pointed wood sticks to pull the trip pins over, rather than poking in from above. It also worked if there were corridor connections.

Also, I suggest that you check the coupler height several times before you adjust the trip pins. They are usually supplied to the right specification.

If you have the height gauge, it has a little platform at the bottom to check trip pin height. However, if you just put the car down with the trip pin on the platform, the coupler will get raised to the right level but can drop below when moved off.  Check by running the car up to the gauge, but don't assume the pin needs adjusting if it catches.

(I will also claim to have started with the mechanical K series. There was a pin going down from the bend in the knuckle and they used a ramp kind of like the old Hornby Dublo but narrower.)

[2E Sub Shed]

 

 

 

16 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

However, it means I have an updated list for layout planning of car destinations I have structures in stock for:

 

1.  Grain Elevator (to be removed when running in Alaska RR mode)

2.  Fuel Oil Distributor

3.  Low relief industry building

4.  Low relief shipping company warehouse

5.  Transload / team track spur (no building needed - possible a small office?)

6.  Depot

 

Heating Oil could be handled on a team track with a simple portable pump to transfer to road tankers, using the tank car as a bunker.

 

Dependent on period, a small ramp / platform against the team track opens up the use of automobile box cars, or gives fork lift access to box cars for cross platform transfer, and a means to off-load flat cars from side.

 

Providing a small pit and auger on the team track would allow bottom discharge hoppers to be unloaded giving coal or  aggregate traffic  as a possibility.

[BR60103]

About 65 years ago I wandered through our local (small town) yard and saw how grain cars were done. There was a sliding door boxcar. The door opening was blocked partway up with boards (horizontal). I think the grain was unloaded by knocking out boards from the top. I think there may have been paper on the inside.

At some point, grain car doors were available in HO. A square of scribed sheeting would probably work.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

My next step in layout planning is one I don’t often see photographed - rather like the first fitting of a bride’s wedding dress, the first appearance of baseboards in the layout room is usually quite a private occasion (the big reveal is saved for later).  As this is a thread written with beginners in mind however, it seemed appropriate to share the joy on this occasion - which is a roundabout way of introducing a very boring set of pictures.

 

Bringing the baseboards in from the outhouse, carrying them upstairs and setting them up in the room showed me two things:

1. The main baseboards at 53” x 19” are a good size for carrying around the house.  I wouldn’t want to take them up the steeper stairs to our attic room, but for a first floor bedroom they’re OK and not too heavy.  A win!
2. On the other hand, the long, thin staging board is a lot more cumbersome and needs more care, worth bearing in mind when it comes to adding scenery I won’t want to get knocked.

(The staging yard board will need its own legs, which I’ve not started yet.  The overhang on the bed actually comes out at 18”, a bit less than I’d allowed for which is a good thing - not an error in measurements: the room isn’t square).

 

Straightaway I can tell two things have worked out well - and both are very big wins for me:

1. An American HO switching based layout looks like the right choice for this space: not too squashed.
2. The U-shaped boards fit into the room really well - the layout ergonomics work, and I still have room to move.

Another ergonomic check was to make sure the staging board didn’t come too far into the doorway:

 

 

Looks like I got those measurements right!

 

The placement of cars, track and buildings is just to get a first feel for the space and are nothing more than convenient: 

 

 

(The toilet rolls and European Branch Line Halt are pretending to be the fuel dealer.  The toothbrushes are on the sink behind the layout - and should have been moved before I took the photo!)

 

I can now move onto the fun stage of trying out structures, track and cars in different positions, to see what clicks.  This may take some time - I want an answer I’ll be happy to not only build but also keep!

 

 

That’ll be all for now - as I indicated a few posts ago, I have a Narrow Gauge deadline to meet for early November, so I really must focus on that side of my modelling now.  Suffice to say, I continue to be pleased with the progress this project is making, even if my design sequence isn’t entirely conventional.  I’ve a long way to go still, but it’s all moving forwards.

 

Finally in other news, I’ve finally bought a new camera and one which has a flash.  Once I’ve worked out how to use it, I’ll hopefully be able to share some better shots this coming winter.  So far I’ve discovered it comes with an integral phone built in, which is interesting, but my kids haven’t been around much this week to give me a tutorial.  Until then, have fun, Keith.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

OK, so I’ll call this a PS: an extra post of ideas I explored while tidying up to focus on my narrow gauge builds (honestly, I was 😃).  I used the clean space to revisit the question of minimum radius.  It’s something discussed earlier in the thread, but now I have the actual baseboards and stock I plan to use, it was worth another look - I found it answered some of the earlier questions, so hope it’s worth sharing:

 

I loosely pinned a curve of approximately 30” radius to the side board between staging and the main boards.  30” is the (notional) inside radius of the Peco Streamline Curved Points I’ve got.

 

As discussed previously, you might get away with 50’ cars on the tighter curves when viewed from the inside, as shown here.  The inner track is UK 3rd radius Setrack (19.88”):

 

 

However, the 30” curve is already looking tight for my RDC unit:

 

 

As the end curve is basically the scenic run for this U-shaped layout, I think this photo sets the minimum radius at 30.”

 

It’s still a bit tight, especially for the 89’ double deck Alaska Railroad Cruise Liner passenger cars, so is still a compromise.

 

 

I then looked at freight train length again, as I wanted to see what the ideal design length will be (using 50’ cars).  I mounted my camera (iPad) on a music stand so each shot could be identical and tried 3, 4, 5 and 6 car consists:

 

 

 

 

 

While 6 cars fits, I think it’s starting to look a bit cramped, so 5 cars might be better - still longer than I’d planned before.

 

The trains were then measured, starting with the six car train and then gradually removing each car back to 3:

 

 

 

6 cars = 59”

5 cars = 52”

4 cars = 45”

3 cars = 38”

 

(plus the same caboose and GP35 in each case)

 

This then gives me more information when I’m thinking of layout ideas while working on my other projects.  

 

I couldn’t resist this last photo to finish!  Have fun, Keith.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2023 by Keith Addenbrooke