Butley Mills - an Iain Rice Suffolk layout

[Andy Vincent]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

These are my home made tweak on the S & W. Made from the same top E guitar wire as the AJ and with no remote uncouple and push facility, as well as being single ended they are almost 100% successful.

 

These look to be in the same vein as Iain's 'Imprecise'. Looking back at Iain's 'Detailing and Improving RTR Wagons', that has an earlier version of the 'imprecise' - the Bringewood Coupling - where the action was inverted so the hook lifted using a tail attracted to a magnet, rather than pulled down in his later version. The RTR book does cover a delayed action variation that is mostly hinted at in the Cameo Layouts book.

 

I am sure he explained somewhere the reasons why the hook was later inverted but I would surmise that the ability to use a dummy three link on the later version and the emergence of guitar wire as a common component might have something to do with it. Removing the need for compatibility with tension locks was likely also a consideration. None of which is to suggest that I have decided! 

[adrianmc]

 

An alternative is a modified Sprat & Winkle as per an article by Iain Rice, way back when.

 

This is the 3mm original version, with the addition of a phosphor bronze overrider which gives the uncouple and push anywhere functionality - the overrider stopping the hook re-engaging.

 

The loop is under the buffer centre line and is fixed in place via a piece of copper clad strip behind the buffer beam. The same copper clad provides the mount for the coupling pivot.

 

The loop is also set slightly behind the buffer line so that when two wagons are pushed together there is a slight gap for the overriders to come up through.

 

The top chain link is soldered perpendicular to the hook and only the bottom link is ferrous - these mods greatly reduce the incidence of the chain getting intertwined with itself and/or the chain on an adjacent item of stock when over a magnet.

 

Locomotives just have the loop.

 

When pushing, contact between items of stock is via the buffers and when pulling its via the couplings - just like the prototype - something I quite like as it just doesn't look right when pushing a train and the buffers don't touch.  

 

Although more obtrusive than an AJ they do have the benefit of the coupling chain links hanging down - and they do work on quite tight radii.

 

They also have a certain robustness that once set up they seem to be able to take fairly rough treatment - a good quality to have when being bounced around in a stock box to and from an exhibition!

 

The pictures show a Rails of Sheffield 3D printed SR van converted to P4 standards and with these modified S&W couplings fitted.

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by adrianmc

[Andy Vincent]

54 minutes ago, adrianmc said:

An alternative is a modified Sprat & Winkle as per an article by Iain Rice, way back when

 

The 'imprecise' described in Cameo Layouts looks to be essentially this concept but using purely spring wire (phosphor bronze) rather than the etched hook. That description is notably vague on how the overrider would be added when using spring wire but it shouldn't be too difficult to work something out if phosphor bronze wire is used since that can be soldered

 

Plenty of food for thought - many thanks for all the suggestions 

[Worsdell forever]

17 hours ago, DavidLong said:

I'm surprised that Jerry didn't suggest DGs. As they lie in line with the buffers they are relatively unobtrusive and allow delayed uncoupling. Used on 'The Depots, Rosedale East' as seen on this 'ere forum. They also don't have the 'harpoon' of the S&W type and no goalposts required.

Please , not Kaydees, absolute sacrilege on this layout.

Lovely work on the layout.

 

David

 

Used DGs for many years, first remember seeing them on a layout called Eivis (I think) from possibly Barnard Castle? then when I saw the late Andy Calvert making them up while demonstrating at Doncaster (remember the balcony in the old racecourse building?) I ordered some that week and I've been hooked (pun very much intended...) ever since. Normally only have to 'intervene' a handful of times during a weekend of shunting at a show. I build them with a loop at one end and delay latch at the other, I don't need to turn anything.

 

[Gilbert]

On 06/08/2023 at 13:09, Gilbert said:

I have a lot of photos from Missenden on my laptop. I'll try to post later this evening. 

Chris H.

Here we go - sorry for the delay...click on the photo for my Flickr album...

Chris Hopper

PS I'd go for S&W couplers...

Edited August 9, 2023 by Gilbert

[RobAllen]

54 minutes ago, Gilbert said:

click on the photo for my Flickr album

Fantastic photos. Thanks for sharing.

[Andy Vincent]

4 hours ago, Gilbert said:

 

A more than honourable mention should go to Chris's own cameo layout that features in the Flickr album. This is based on the Scale Model Scenery baseboards that fit into a 77l Really Useful Box (or two). This option provides much food for thought for future projects . . . .

[Gilbert]

3 hours ago, Andy Vincent said:

 

A more than honourable mention should go to Chris's own cameo layout that features in the Flickr album. This is based on the Scale Model Scenery baseboards that fit into a 77l Really Useful Box (or two). This option provides much food for thought for future projects . . . .

Thanks Andy appreciated....however the pleasure we all got from seeing your progress on BM will be my overriding memory of this year's Missenden Summer week.

[Izzy]

Just to add to the mix here are a few shots of the 2mm S&W's I use adapted for 4mm on my P4 plank (currently being re-built). I haven't fitted 3-links but rather some soft iron wire set forward so that one small 6mm round magnet can be sunk between sleepers and operate them. I had to do this as there is no room to fit elecro-magnets under baseboard as it's only 30mm thick and made of layered foamcore.

 

 

 

 

Bob

[Gilbert]

10 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Just to add to the mix here are a few shots of the 2mm S&W's I use adapted for 4mm on my P4 plank (currently being re-built). I haven't fitted 3-links but rather some soft iron wire set forward so that one small 6mm round magnet can be sunk between sleepers and operate them. I had to do this as there is no room to fit elecro-magnets under baseboard as it's only 30mm thick and made of layered foamcore.

 

 

 

 

Bob

Great innovation  - I may think about that - a lot easier than making up those 3-links!

Chris H

[Andy Vincent]

Apologies for the lack of posts: the last few weeks have been truly manic! Very evidently still a work in progress but Butley Mills made it to Uckfield. I had hoped to get a little further along than I managed but the very many positive comments and the clear fondness for the layout from people who had just seen it in Iain's books certainly was hugely encouraging. I hadn't fully appreciated the extent to which Iain's used names of friends on the buildings on the layout: it was especially good to meet some of them and hear their stories, as well as meeting some members of Iain's family. I was also grateful to @queensquare for tracking down the original road vehicles.

 

Next will be a period of consolidation before pushing on again with the focus on rolling stock, adding a backscene, and completing the general refurbishment.  I will post some more photos in the coming weeks especially as I get some rolling stock together. On the million dollar question, my current thinking is to use Dingham's. There was much discussion of backscenes at Uckfield. Having talked with many people, the most likely option seems to be to add the implied lane at the back of the layout and then add a plain backscene spaced well back from the hedge that will define the lane. The key will be to ensure that no shadows are cast on it.

 

In the meantime, a couple of quick photos:

[Gilbert]

Andy - that looks great - obviously you've made major progress since the summer. I think the simple presentation of fascia and (accidental) neutral back scene is spot on and enhances but does not distract from the original masterpiece.

Chris H

 

[pwr]

I was there! Perhaps I could be permitted to add a couple of images of my own. The layout is delightful

 

 

 

 

Paul R

[t-b-g]

The work you are doing on this lovely layout is really paying off.

 

Having seen what you have been getting up to at Missenden, then seeing the photos of the layout at the show, perhaps the biggest compliment I can pay is to say that what you have been doing, which is really quite extensive, just doesn't show at all. It blends in with the original work on the layout seamlessly.

 

Tony Gee

[PMP]

Unfortunately due to the weather I couldn’t get to Uckfield and was looking forward to seeing the Rice layouts together. I saw Butley in its early days probably at a London City Uni Scalefourum. When I read you were refurbishing it I did wonder how your work would blend with the original. From the images here and elsewhere it looks an excellent and sympathetic mix. Seeing you’re considering Dinghams this is how I’ve got on with them,

https://albionyard.com/2018/12/29/notes-from-the-man-cave-getting-to-grips-with-dinghams/
Downside is that stock has to be handed, which hasn’t really been a disadvantage for my layout, and probably won’t be on Butley. You do need gentle curves for uncoupling to work, or straight track. 

[Andy Vincent]

41 minutes ago, PMP said:

Seeing you’re considering Dinghams this is how I’ve got on with them,

https://albionyard.com/2018/12/29/notes-from-the-man-cave-getting-to-grips-with-dinghams/

Your article, along with experiences with them on some of the club's (SHMRC) layouts, was a significant factor in focussing on that option. One of the (many) clever aspects to the original design of Butley Mills is that whilst the point work has very sharp deviations (almost all A5) the balance of the trackwork has only gentle curves. Experiments so far suggest that Dinghams should be fine - I just need the S4 Stores to receive the stock that have ordered. I did talk with Jeremy at Uckfield and he is going to chase up the etchers this week if anyone else is waiting.

[Andy Vincent]

2 hours ago, pwr said:

 

 

This photo (aside from showing that my pre-show vacuum was not as thorough as it could have been!) highlights an interesting aspect of Butley Mills' history. 

 

The sign in the foreground - as was also pointed out to me by a visitor - indicates that you are approaching a gated level crossing and gates are visible in some of the original photographs. The holes for the gate posts were also evident when I rebuilt the crossing. However, the gates have gone by the time later photographs were taken. My best guess is that Iain found manually operating that gates tedious (aside from the 'hand of god' intervention required) so he removed them. Interestingly, the gate across the goods yard entrance appears to be identical to the original crossing gates so I suspect it was repurposed.

 

I have the gate that was used for the yard but it wasn't refitted for Uckfield because it is now very brittle and I want to copy it before any further harm comes to it. I plan to reinstate the level crossing gates given that they were originally present and that servos make such features easier to automate now.

 

PS: the missing fuel tanks will also be refitted to the top of the wall above the pump before the next appearance of the layout. Also on the list (aside from very many other items) is consideration of what to do about the 'enamel' signs. These should look tired and faded but at the moment are too evidently faded and curled photos and so tend to jar, although some more than others.

[Andy Vincent]

4 hours ago, Gilbert said:

I think the simple presentation of fascia and (accidental) neutral back scene is spot on

The back scene was a happy accident - although such was @adrianmc's impeccable show planning that I may be doing him a disservice in that it was all part of his planning! It did provoke much discussion and revision of my thinking about this aspect. The one unsatisfactory aspect is that there are three places (next to Archers, by the goods yard and by the forge) where the lane either falls off the layout or disappears into the distance (in true Wizard of Oz style) depending on your perspective. This led to the discussion that if this 'implied lane' was defined by the hedge on its far side then a plain back scene would work well as long as any shadows are killed. Fortunately, there is enough depth available to not have to resort to cantilever arrangements so that should be possible. The mill end could use trees as a view blocker whilst the slight rise towards the chapel provides the option for the lane to have dropped out of sight beyond that point. That just leaves the end of the headshunt where some treatment is needed - likely just bushes that are encroaching on the end of the line.

[John B]

It looks fabulous - every bit as good as I remember it from (I think) seeing it at the old Warley club show at the Harry Mitchell Centre in Smethwick, back when I was a student in Brum. The "proscenium arch" presentation makes a distinct visual improvement, and the character of the original is maintained, even enhanced. A simple backscene will gild the lily.

 

Great to see the overhaul and upgrade done so well, and to see one of my favorite layouts of all time with a new lease of life.

[darthmh]

It was great to see the layout in Person at the Uckfield show,    

[adrianmc]

A retrospective of the Uckfield Exhibition has just been uploaded to the Uckfield Club's website.

 

http://www.uckfieldmrc.co.uk/exhib23nf.html

 

I just wish to say thank you to Andy for agreeing to bring Butley Mills along as part of the Iain Rice Extravaganza - its appearance was much appreciated by our visitors.

[Ramblin Rich]

Many thanks for posting up the exhibition images. I doubt we will see so many Rice layouts together again, more's the pity....

[Andy Vincent]

On 27/11/2023 at 15:56, Ramblin Rich said:

I doubt we will see so many Rice layouts together again

Possibly true although three of the 'Uckfield Five' are in the care of either the South Hants MRC or its members so maybe not completely impossible. There is also at least one other that wasnt at Uckfield. Hopefully they will all be at least occasional visitors to exhibitions here and there.

 

In the case of Butley Mills, I will post some more updates after Christmas once there is some progress to post about - which is tied to my making progress through the backlog of domestic activities that built up in the dash to get Butley Mills relatively presentable! 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Andy Vincent

[NHY 581]

Morning Andy, 

 

Bit late but lovely to see Butley at Uckfield. I could only manage a couple of short visits pre doors opening as I had to get back to my own layout but Butley did not disappoint. You're very lucky to be the custodian of such a lovely layout. 

I also managed a few photos but apologise for any duplication with those previously posted. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rob

 

Edited November 29, 2023 by NHY 581

[fezza]

On 23/10/2023 at 11:15, Andy Vincent said:

This photo (aside from showing that my pre-show vacuum was not as thorough as it could have been!) highlights an interesting aspect of Butley Mills' history. 

 

The sign in the foreground - as was also pointed out to me by a visitor - indicates that you are approaching a gated level crossing and gates are visible in some of the original photographs. The holes for the gate posts were also evident when I rebuilt the crossing. However, the gates have gone by the time later photographs were taken. My best guess is that Iain found manually operating that gates tedious (aside from the 'hand of god' intervention required) so he removed them. Interestingly, the gate across the goods yard entrance appears to be identical to the original crossing gates so I suspect it was repurposed.

 

I have the gate that was used for the yard but it wasn't refitted for Uckfield because it is now very brittle and I want to copy it before any further harm comes to it. I plan to reinstate the level crossing gates given that they were originally present and that servos make such features easier to automate now.

 

PS: the missing fuel tanks will also be refitted to the top of the wall above the pump before the next appearance of the layout. Also on the list (aside from very many other items) is consideration of what to do about the 'enamel' signs. These should look tired and faded but at the moment are too evidently faded and curled photos and so tend to jar, although some more than others.

 

Iain's article in MRJ 9 shows a crossing gate across the 'main' line.  It looks to be of a Great Eastern pattern, although the picture isn't very clear.  There is also a gate contained in the plan of the same issue so it was definitely there.  There was also a short  fence or a gate at the end of the path that leads down from the old chapel to the track.  That seems to have been removed too.

 

I'd be interested to know what stock you use.  Iain used a modified Mainline J72 and a 4F at one stage. That stuck in my mind as I had both as a youngster and loved them both.  My ancient Mainline J72 is still running on my (under construction) GE light railway - like Iain, I found you could get a great crawl out of this loco on a good controller.  They did get to East Anglia, but were mainly to be found in Ipswich I believe?  Later a kitbuilt Buckjumper seemed to be the mainstay on Butley Mills.  Today we are so lucky with high-quality RTR J15s, J70s and, soon, an RTR Buckjumper.

 

Are there any new plans to attend exhibitions?  I'd love to see this legendary layout in the flesh.