Wencombe/Kingsbridge Regis/Louville Lane

[buffalo]

Actually on curved track they should be on the inside of the curve...

I've heard this before and never really questioned it. After all, it makes sense that you would want to avoid the possibility of the wires between the posts overhanging the line. However, when looking through a few books for something quite different I happened to notice some photos in which the wires were on the outside of curves. Looking further, I found a roughly equal number of inside and outside examples and, thinking about it, it is fairly obvious why this happens. Firstly, most telegraph poles are sited further from the rails than other lineside equipment, often considerably further. Given a post separation around sixty yards it would require very tight curves for there to be any chance of the wires overlapping the rails. Lines rarely curve in only one direction and some (e.g. the S&DJR around Wellow) have long sequences of reverse curves. What should be done in these cases? Following the principle of placing the wires on the inside of curves, there could be frequent crossovers where the wires have to switch from one side to the other. Surely this would create a greater potential hazard?

 

I'm coming to the conclusion that, though it might have been a broad guiding principle for siting poles on the prototype, it's really more of a modellers' myth.

 

Nick

[Clive Mortimore]

I've heard this before and never really questioned it. After all, it makes sense that you would want to avoid the possibility of the wires between the posts overhanging the line. However, when looking through a few books for something quite different I happened to notice some photos in which the wires were on the outside of curves. Looking further, I found a roughly equal number of inside and outside examples and, thinking about it, it is fairly obvious why this happens. Firstly, most telegraph poles are sited further from the rails than other lineside equipment, often considerably further. Given a post separation around sixty yards it would require very tight curves for there to be any chance of the wires overlapping the rails. Lines rarely curve in only one direction and some (e.g. the S&DJR around Wellow) have long sequences of reverse curves. What should be done in these cases? Following the principle of placing the wires on the inside of curves, there could be frequent crossovers where the wires have to switch from one side to the other. Surely this would create a greater potential hazard?

 

I'm coming to the conclusion that, though it might have been a broad guiding principle for siting poles on the prototype, it's really more of a modellers' myth.

 

Nick

 

Hi Nick

 

Did you read my post regarding why the poles are placed on the inside of the track?

Hi Alan

 

65 yards was the normal distance between poles. This could be increased to 70 yards in exceptional cricumstances. On curves it could be reduced to 60 or even 50 yards. As Mike stated the poles would be on the inside of the curve, if there was a wire come off or a pole is pulled over the running line would not be fouled. The spacing of 55 to 70 yards would give many model railways far less poles than they seem to have.

 

[buffalo]

Did you read my post regarding why the poles are placed on the inside of the track?

Yes, Clive, but did you read mine? I said:

...it makes sense that you would want to avoid the possibility of the wires between the posts overhanging the line...

and I take your point about falling poles, but, I also mentioned that observation of prototype photos does not support the idea that poles are always placed on the inside of curves. I also said

...most telegraph poles are sited further from the rails than other lineside equipment, often considerably further...

In some cases, at least, this would avoid the fallen pole problem.

 

Nick

[Oldddudders]

I think Nick's point about looking at photographs supports Rule 1 of convincing modelling - what did the prototype actually do? I also struggle to imagine the criss-crossing of the line that would be needed where reverse curves existed to meet the inside of the bend idea - and I believe the railway is in many places riddled with reverse curves. And how was the line crossed? Just by aerial wires - or were they cabled in an under-track crossing?

[The Stationmaster]

I think Nick's point about looking at photographs supports Rule 1 of convincing modelling - what did the prototype actually do? I also struggle to imagine the criss-crossing of the line that would be needed where reverse curves existed to meet the inside of the bend idea - and I believe the railway is in many places riddled with reverse curves. And how was the line crossed? Just by aerial wires - or were they cabled in an under-track crossing?

 

Interesting this - I thought I'd pick out a nice curvaceous section of route (Newton Abbot - Plymouth) to see what I could see from pics. Interesting result - up Dainton bank the lines were clearly in cable in places, at Aller Junction the pole route on the Paignton branch was inside the initial curve and reached by an overhead route from the middle of the junction vee, poles inside the curve at Wrangaton with an overhead connection to the signalbox, poles outside the curve between Plymouth North Road and Mutley (but there were a couple of sidings for part of the way) then crossed over as overhead to inside the curve before going into cable to go through the tunnel. So some quite big overhead routes crossing from one side to another.

 

. But it looks as if outside the curve is perfectly ok when the poles are down an embankment and at other times if someone had decided to go that side for a reason. Net conclusion - refer to photos and get even more confused

[buffalo]

One thing that we haven't mentioned yet is the use of guy ropes. My impression, again from photos, is that these were frequently used as a defence against fouling by fallen poles when they had to be sited close to the lines, whichever side they were on.

 

Nick

[Clive Mortimore]

One thing that we haven't mentioned yet is the use of guy ropes. My impression, again from photos, is that these were frequently used as a defence against fouling by fallen poles when they had to be sited close to the lines, whichever side they were on.

 

Nick

 

In the signalling book I mentioned quite a few pages in the chapter on Telephone and Telegraph Line Construction are on the use of stays and struts. If anyone thinks this should be on this forum I will start a new topic in Permanent Way, Signalling & Infrastructure so Alan can have his topic on his wonderful layout back. Please PM me.

 

Clive

[westerner]

Thanks guys for all yor answers. I feel for 60 yds apart(72 cms in 4mm) with a sag of 4-6mm is a bit much for most layouts. I think many compress the distance between poles as we compress station lengths etc. I suspect I'll reduce it to a distance of 600mm a scale distance of 50 ft. But I'll suck it and see what actual distance I have to cover.

One more question Were the wires conduited through a tation. I was thinking of the Main and branch linres being overground at the stream end of the layout to the signal box and then restarting the poles just past the diry. imagining the wires would be underground or conduited through the station.

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks guys for all yor answers. I feel for 60 yds apart(72 cms in 4mm) with a sag of 4-6mm is a bit much for most layouts. I think many compress the distance between poles as we compress station lengths etc. I suspect I'll reduce it to a distance of 600mm a scale distance of 50 ft. But I'll suck it and see what actual distance I have to cover.

One more question Were the wires conduited through a tation. I was thinking of the Main and branch linres being overground at the stream end of the layout to the signal box and then restarting the poles just past the diry. imagining the wires would be underground or conduited through the station.

Arrangements at stations varied, quite a lot! In many cases pole routes simply continued often with a crossing at right angles to reach the signalbox and or station buildings (although the latter were invariably on selective ringing circuits at smaller stations so they usually only need a couple of conductors. At larger stations cable seems to have been increasingly common from the 1930s onwards if pics are any guide and earlier than that in some cases and it tended to be fixed to platform front walls judging by most that I can remember seeing or have seen in pics.

[Happy Hippo]

Much as I admire the thought of modelling the wires on telegraph poles, I fear that if I were to do it:

 

a. The 4 mm stuff indoors would end up as a cats cradle as I reached through the wires to clean some track or replace a derailed item of stock.

 

b. The large scale stuff outdoors would have birds landing on them and create a guano pool at the pole base, and my dogs would invariably blunder into them as they patrol the garden against cats pigeons and rabbits.

 

 

(I've suddenly had a cartoon like vision of the bigger dog with the wires at full stretch, and then being catapulted back down the garden into the water feature)

 

Regards

 

Richard

[devondynosoar118]

Not to mention the way dogs like to cock a leg on the full sized ones, that could have interesting consequences on a model, especially if they are near the track!

[Oldddudders]

Not to mention the way dogs like to cock a leg on the full sized ones, that could have interesting consequences on a model, especially if they are near the track!

Reminds me of a former Control colleague, Harold, or rather his dog. Harold drove a Bedford Beagle van, which he referred to as his "shooting brake". Rover the dog would be in the van throughout the shift, so we all knew him - a sort of Setter type, I suppose. One night, Harold told us, they'd gone walkies and Rover decided that this particular lamp standard needed christening - only to discover the earth wasn't quite up to snuff. Harold swore he heard Rover say "Crikey, my water's strong tonight!"

[devondynosoar118]

Lol! There is a cameo in the making! Bet his coat stood on end for a while.

[westerner]

At last finished the fencing this afternoon,

 

Here are some pix.

 

 

 

[Pannier Tank]

Great photo's; particularly the pannier!

[MinZaPint]

Reminds me of a former Control colleague, Harold, or rather his dog. Harold drove a Bedford Beagle van, which he referred to as his "shooting brake". Rover the dog would be in the van throughout the shift, so we all knew him - a sort of Setter type, I suppose. One night, Harold told us, they'd gone walkies and Rover decided that this particular lamp standard needed christening - only to discover the earth wasn't quite up to snuff. Harold swore he heard Rover say "Crikey, my water's strong tonight!"

 

Had a similar experience after chopping chillies! memo wash hands very thoroughly next time.

[westerner]

OOOOUCH!!!!!!

[westerner]

Now that the fencing is finished I've been working on the atatic grass around the streeam area, add some "yellow flowers" and sunburnt grass.

 

4561 on her wat down the branch.

 

 

[gwrrob]

Thats really nice Alan.I have a photo similar to that taken of 4561 on the Kingsbridge branch with the fireman in a pose like that.Inspiration perhaps ?

[westerner]

Just good luck. I'm pleased you like the photos.

[Physicsman]

Alan, first picture in post 464 is absolutely superb. So much detail in a small area of the layout. Wonderful stuff!

 

What did you use for the water? Woodland Scenics Realistic Water, Deluxe Materials or old-fashioned varnish?

 

Jeff

[westerner]

If I remember Jeff the stream was painted brown with the odd greenish streak and then PVA'd.It didn't look quite right (no Depth) so the chippings were glued on (another layer of PVA) and then all allowed to dry. In fact I left for several months but still not too happy. I then discovered a bottle of Realistic Water that i'd used on a previous layout. It looked as if it had enough in it for a couple of layers. Which is what happened leaving about a week between layers (each one no more than a max of 1mm probably only about 0.5mm. In fact I managed to get 3 layers on.

 

A Word of warning do not make the layers too thick or it will not set properly. On the old layout where it was used in harbour I thought after several days it had gone off enough to place the boats on it. A few weeks later I decided i wanted to detail one of them only to find it was well and truly stuck to the layout.

[Physicsman]

If I remember Jeff the stream was painted brown with the odd greenish streak and then PVA'd.It didn't look quite right (no Depth) so the chippings were glued on (another layer of PVA) and then all allowed to dry. In fact I left for several months but still not too happy. I then discovered a bottle of Realistic Water that i'd used on a previous layout. It looked as if it had enough in it for a couple of layers. Which is what happened leaving about a week between layers (each one no more than a max of 1mm probably only about 0.5mm. In fact I managed to get 3 layers on.

 

A Word of warning do not make the layers too thick or it will not set properly. On the old layout where it was used in harbour I thought after several days it had gone off enough to place the boats on it. A few weeks later I decided i wanted to detail one of them only to find it was well and truly stuck to the layout.

 

Many thanks for that! I actually have 2 bottles of Realistic Water that I've never opened - I had a "pond" on my old layout that never got filled up! So when I come to do the "river" on Kirkby Luneside I should have plenty of material. It says on the bottle to use thin layers - good to have it confirmed by a practitioner.

 

Cheers,

 

Jeff

[westerner]

One last photo of the stream end of the layout. A little photoshopping in the bottom corners to hide the baseboard edge.

 

[devondynosoar118]

Love the shots of 4561, looks spot on!