Eastwood Town - A tribute to Gordon's modelling.

[gordon s]

Hi Geoff...:-)

 

Are you talking about steam or diesel locos?  

 

Earlier versions of ET had 1:50 gradients and nothing less than 3' radius, but my steam loco's would certainly slow on the gradient and starting halfway up meant loads of wheel spin to get them moving.  Diesels were fine as they have more weight and multi drive axles.  I was running Bachmann Mk1's with the weight removed and they were a problem.

 

Hats off to you if you are getting those results!

 

You'll have to let me into your secret as I couldn't get near those figures, hence the 1:100 gradients on this version.

[G.M.R.]

Hi Geoff...:-)

 

Are you talking about steam or diesel locos?  

 

Earlier versions of ET had 1:50 gradients and nothing less than 3' radius, but my steam loco's would certainly slow on the gradient and starting halfway up meant loads of wheel spin to get them moving.  Diesels were fine as they have more weight and multi drive axles.  I was running Bachmann Mk1's with the weight removed and they were a problem.

 

Hats off to you if you are getting those results!

 

You'll have to let me into your secret as I couldn't get near those figures, hence the 1:100 gradients on this version.

So you got me into going and turning on the train set to make some live tests. Firstly a small error. My longest train is eight coaches not nine. A mixture of Hornby and Bachmann Mk1s. Here they are being hauled up the incline by Deltic:-

 

 

No surprise here. Runs at good speed and could pull many more.

 

Next my latest acquisition, Hornby Sound fitted P2:-

 

 

Same train. Won't go at scale speed of 60mph, but 20 or 30 OK. Does give a little wheel slip when starting half way up. Biggest problem is taking any curve at the top of a rise. The front pair of the eight driving wheels tends to ride over the curving track and stay straight. My 9F doesn't do this despite having ten drivers, due, I think to the flangeless centre pair. Have to keep the P2 on level track duties, or on shed.

 

Finally a Bachmann A1. Sound fitted Sea Eagle:-

 

 

 

Takes the curve at the top of the incline fine. As well as the eight coaches, a small extra of a coupling converting wagon!

 

It only runs slowly, but it has to take care due to the yellow aspect anyway.

[gordon s]

Love to Geoff!  I can see a lot of work has gone into Mangarth since my last visit, so lets see if we can drag Dave out for 18 holes once it warms up a little.  

 

A round of golf plus a pub lunch and then some time to enjoy your railway.  Sounds perfect to me.....

Edited February 16, 2016 by gordon s

[aardvark]

As I recall, somewhere in the last 100 pages, Gordon did a wonderful job of writing a "this is what I do" tutorial.  Not just turnout construction or ballasting, but everything from cutting ply, cork underlay, and so forth.  As someone that is slowly edging towards their first layout, I'd really appreciate locating this resource again, assuming it is other than in my imagination.  I've just skimmed 30-odd pages without result.  I'm happy to start from page 1, but I was hoping that there might be someone out there that might have it bookmarked.

 

Anyone?

[gordon s]

Just  got up to make some tea for my good lady and saw your post Aardvark.  Thank you for your kind words and an index is something I have been considering but invariably I get overtaken by other things.  I suspect the thought of the task makes it seems much worse that it might be, so a bit like hand building your own track, it stops you starting the whole thing.....:-)

 

Every time I see a question on RMweb where I feel I may be able to help, I find myself struggling to find the relevant posts, so an index would help me considerably also.  No promises right now as I'm in full flow building baseboards and the trackbed for this variant of ET, but I will try to do something long term.

 

It's very heartening to know that others get something from my ramblings....

[aardvark]

Gordon, there is much in your thread that I find educational and encouraging.  Your inclination to provide detail on your techniques certainly helps this beginner.

 

An an engineer, I am particularly taken with your process beginning with printing out the track plan full-scale, then using it to cut ply and lay track.  It just makes sense.  I think that there is much to be gained by following your example, even though I'm using AnyRail and Peco Streamline,

 

No need to spend valuable time on an index: I would rather see you put track down, rolling stock rolling, and some scenics ... um ... scenic-ing!

 

If I can't find what I am imagining, I might attempt a description myself.  Then you need only correct my errors.

 

cheers!

[G.M.R.]

Using the site search engine on just this topic with a single keyword is almost as good as an index. Try underlay for example.

[Ian_H]

So who's going to build the .., hang on, what are we going to call it, The Eastwood Town Wiki, The E.T. Wiki, Gordons Wiki or how about Gordons ET Wiki!

 

I seem to remember, way back in the archives, that there was a discussion about Gordons ET-TV along the lines of the New Yankee Workshop.

 

 

Keep up the good work Gordon

[aardvark]

Using the site search engine on just this topic with a single keyword is almost as good as an index. Try underlay for example.

 

Much obliged - didn't realise you could do this.

 

I've tried searching before, but I think I have been mislead as the default looks like "this topic" but is actually "Google site search", which yields a bazillion hits when you search for something like underlay.  But now I understand how to make it work - click where it says "this topic" and actually select "this topic" from the list before searching.  Works a treat! Brilliant!  Certainly beats trawling 106 pages!

[gordon s]

Thanks for all your supportive and humorous comments.  They really are appreciated, particularly when you have been toiling away for hours on sections and still have little to show for it.  There is a reason for that. As always I'm learning on the job, so mistakes have been many.  I may give the impression that I know what I'm doing, but in reality building a layout is still stepping into the unknown for me.  Whilst I may have the basic skills, you never really learn how to do things without making errors or misjudgements along the way.

 

I had virtually finished the wood work for all the lower levels, but something was really bugging me.  I had made all the risers from 12mm ply and a softwood bearer and whilst they appeared to be OK, there were several areas that I was unhappy with.  Even over a short length of typically 200-300mm, there was some movement in the assembly and the finished article didn't appear to be as solid as I would have wished. Several more designs were tried and the best results came from using 90 x 20 softwood in a T shape.  Once in place everything was rock solid and there was a huge plus to the design.

 

One of the things that has bugged me in the past was wiring and I found the task of laying on my back and soldering wires 3'-4' above you particularly tiring.  I had to always wear safety glasses to protect my eyes from molten solder drops and that that gave me some difficulties as I wear glasses for close up work and reading. The wiring distance of 3'-4' above my head was just outside the focal range of my glasses and yet inside the clear focal length of my own eyes, so I was always working in a slightly out of focus world under a baseboard.

 

From the outset I had planned to build each trackbed as a self contained module which would allow me to remove the module and work on my bench.  The track could be laid, painted and ballasted in 1200mm modules with all the wiring done as well.  Each module would then be joined to the main bus and the relatively few turnouts that required switching could have their switch leads added later.  The big benefit of using dual 12v supplies with Tortoise motors is that only one wire needs to go back to the control panel.

 

In my attempts to firm up the 12mm ply risers, I decided to glue each riser to the trackbed and then use screws to fasten it to the frame.  This would still allow me to remove each module with a riser each end, but the chances or realigning the track afterwards were significantly reduced and as such I have abandoned that method and gone to T shape softwood.

 

This means the risers remain fixed to the frame and just the trackbed and side cheeks are removed as one unit for wiring.

 

Currently I've gone two steps backwards (no change there then.... ) and have been gradually working my way round changing all the risers.  Of course that means some of the support blocks have been in the way so those have had to be carefully relocated and the risers that were glued and screwed to each end of the trackbed have also had to be sawn down the glue line so as to leave the underside of the trackbed undamaged.

 

Probably easier to show a pic than try to describe, so here the underside of the boards on the approach up to ET terminus.  There are four modules in parallel here.  From the left they are the double track up to ET, the single return from the reverse loop on a 1:100 gradient, the pair of continuous loop lines and finally on the right the down feed to to reverse loop.  You can see each module and the new T risers in place.  The beauty of this type of assembly is that there are few cross struts, but the trackbed is really solid and would support several house bricks without any deflection.

 

 

Just so it makes sense, here is the track side view of the same boards....

 

 

Got a fairly hectic next couple of weeks so it may be a few weeks until all the risers are replaced and then tracklaying can commence.

 

Whoopee!

Edited February 20, 2016 by gordon s

[gordon s]

Well things at ET are at last moving smoothly forward and I hope to be laying track within the next couple of weeks.  I've said since the beginning that whilst I am happy with the approach into ET terminus and the number and length of platforms, the goods facilities and the shed area are OK, but I know with your help we can do better.

 

Right up front, this is a train set and whilst I would like to loosely adhere to prototype practice, the enjoyment of operating and watching trains go by has always been my motivation.  Over the years I have been lucky enough to assemble a wide range of BR Eastern Region stock and the time period I have in mind is from the early 60's during the crossover period from steam to diesel.  I'd like to be able to run a wide selection of loco's and it's important to me to have a decent size shed, plus a coaling stage and turntable.  Those of you who have followed ET for years will know I was able to acquire from Gilbert Barnatt his buildings that formed the basis of his early Peterborough layout.  They were built by Alan Downes and are of wood/card construction and of a very good standard.  They will need some minor repairs as after five or six years sitting in a cupboard, a few bits have fallen off or been knocked and some of the brick paper has bubbled.  Nothing that can't be put right, so they will form the basis of any shed/goods facility.

 

Here's a plan of the layout with the goods area in blue and the shed in pink.  The black lines are ET terminus and platforms and should not be changed unless there is no alternative but a minor change.

 

 

So you know what were playing with here's a few pics of the buildings.

 

A four road engine shed with office.  It's quite a large building, but one side is unfinished as it facing a back wall and not seen.  This could be completed, but if possible it needs to be located in a similar fashion with the blank wall towards the wall of my railway room.

 

 

A coaling stage including a hopper loading system.

 

 

A basic shed/workshop building.

 

 

A water tower.

 

 

Here's an earlier version of an ET shed area showing the relative size of each building.

 

 

I'm hoping the turntable will be a Metalsmiths brass kit with a stepper motor control.  Just waiting for them to release the 70' Cowans and Sheldon kit.

 

The shed will take four roads on 50mm centres.  The coaling stage will require an access road for 16 tonners.

 

Overall the plan I have allows all those elements to be fitted but I'm not happy with access nor am I sure the flow through the shed itself is correct.  I know I said it's a train set, but I don't want any real howlers.  Small ones I can live with as Rule 1 will apply.....:-)

 

There is plenty of room at the top right of the layout so space shouldn't be an issue.

 

As far as the goods facilities are concerned, I have several industrial buildings.  There is a whole string of low profile industrial units and those can be seen here in an earlier ET.

 

 

There is also a large factory building with two sets of loading doors.  This building is huge and I will need to locate it carefully to stop it dominating the whole layout.  I have some ideas, but nothing concrete as such.

 

 

My preferred building in the station area is this brewery plus loading platform.

 

 

My thoughts about opening this can of worms right now is that my carpentry is now moving along well and I will soon be laying track.  As such I really need to understand any proposal and how they might impact the work I have planned.

 

There is one rule though.  No matter how good any proposals you may have, I will not consider a complete redesign.....

 

Minor mods possibly, but nothing major, so we will need to work around the planned access and the existing station plan shown in black.  The proposed goods area is in blue and the shed area is in pink.  Feel free to offer suggestions on how to deal with these two areas.

 

I have every faith we can come up with something workable that will not involve any redesign and yet will be loosely based on prototype practice where possible.  That is not the most important parameter for me. Enjoying the trains with a few mates and a few beers is what it is all about and it's unlikely they will spot anything that is a minor deviation from prototype practice.

 

I shall look forward to discussing your ideas....

Edited February 21, 2016 by gordon s

[BoD]

Looking at the shed Gordon, it might be an idea for you to think about what a loco needs to do and in what order.  Will the track layout you have and the intended position of your 'facilities' make this a simple process or a series of complex movements. Just a thought.

[gordon s]

Thanks BoD, but in a sense that's part of the problem. Whilst I spent most weekends bunking into sheds and I know steam loco's need coal and water, I don't know the process from A to B to C.

 

Were loco's placed under cover in the shed because they were being worked on or was it just somewhere undercover to leave a loco?

 

If a loco was in daily service was it just left outside with the fire left in tickover?

 

I'm embarrassed after all these years to admit I don't really know the answers, yet I often wandered around sheds just enjoying the smell and the sheer engineering brilliance of steam locomotives.

 

Any pointers would really help understand the normal process.

[92220]

Hi Gordon,

 

If it helps, the basic sequence at Camden was:

 

Arrive on shed

Turn

Coal

Water

Ash and fire disposal

Stabled at south end facing north ready to back down to Euston.

 

I think that other sheds would have had possible differences in the sequence according to space etc. But someone more knowledgeable will help I am sure.

 

Best wishes,

 

Iain

[BoD]

I'm a bit like that too, Gordon.  I read an article about this somewhere. I will try to remember where and dig it out.

I'm sure one of your other esteemed readers will be able to shed (sorry) light on this.

 

Perhaps if your main aim is to watch the mainline trains go by it may not be necessary to get this exactly spot on.

[dseagull]

As I recall, somewhere in the last 100 pages, Gordon did a wonderful job of writing a "this is what I do" tutorial.  Not just turnout construction or ballasting, but everything from cutting ply, cork underlay, and so forth.  As someone that is slowly edging towards their first layout, I'd really appreciate locating this resource again, assuming it is other than in my imagination.  I've just skimmed 30-odd pages without result.  I'm happy to start from page 1, but I was hoping that there might be someone out there that might have it bookmarked.

 

Anyone?

Here's the ballasting one http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/80480-ballasting-without-tearson-thin-sleeper-track/

[mightbe]

There is a lovely video of an ex-LMS shed (Chester) on YouTube. It follows a Standard 5 through the entire process. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fWnjd2eftY

 

In a nutshell, the order for that (modernized, as I understand it) shed was 1. water, 2. ash, 3. cooling/move to shed, 4. examination, 5. washout, 6. disassembly/repair, 7. reassembly, 8. coal, 9. on-duty.

 

Quentin

Edited February 21, 2016 by mightbe

[Buhar]

I'e seen a number of sequences described, including variations in the same geographic areas.  

Water, Coal, Fire, Ash, Turn, Shed  

Coal, Fire, Ash, Turn, Water, Shed

Fire, Ash, Water, Shed, Water, Coal, Turn.  

Water, Coal, Fire, Ash, Shed, Water, Turn.

 

A lot depends on layout to determine the sequence (rather than the other way round), can you dump the ash while coaling?  Are there water columns on the shed roads?  Other bits will be local practice, is it expected that you come on shed with a low fire and plenty of water and that will depend on the services worked and locations.  If you've got to get out of a busy terminus (Eastwood Town) quickly, you won't have time to fill up there.

 

The LMS did re-configure a number of depots to facilitate a flow, but in most cases most sheds were designed originally for small engines and with basic facilities.  Bigger turntables, mechanical plant, shear legs (are you putting in a set of them?) all came later.  Sometimes they would fit nicely, sometimes things could be re-jigged, but often they had to be installed where there was space.

 

Perhaps you need to decide on a back-story for the depot, is is a constrained space that ended up requiring a fair bit of shunting to dispose of a loco, or was it re-laid somewhat when the coaling plant was installed, in which case it should flow.

 

I do think ready access to and from the station is required, that would have been needed even in the early days.  But within the shed, see what looks right and then use the sequence that best fits the installation.

[jukebox]

Gordon

 

The best advice I can offer is to track down a copy of either one or both of Paul Bolger's "BR Steam Motive Power Depot" volumes for ER or NER.

 

These volumes have sketches of the track layout in each depot in the region, and lots of useful, if small, photos.

 

Whilst ET is not location specific, if you could find a prototype to base your shed on, I'm sure with your attention to detail, you'd find it a lot more satisfying than creating fiction.

 

I went down that road when planning Stockrington, and found that in the end, it was much more satisfying being able to have a prototype to work with - and as it turned out, with both Stockton and Haverton Hill being similar, it gives me a useful "style guide" when making planning decisions.

 

Oh, and agree totally about the Metalsmiths 70' Cowans and Sheldon kit - like yourself, will jump on that if/when it finally comes to fruition.

 

Regards

 

Scott

Edited February 22, 2016 by jukebox

[mightbe]

Gordon, right now access is fairly poor from all platforms except one. Have you considered scrapping the current shed arrangement? I'd start by relocating the access track so as to 'catch' more platforms directly.

 

If you move the connection further back 'round the curve (trailing access to a kickback), you could arrange the shed against the "north" wall and lay out the rest of the MPD on a roughly east-west axis. The unfinished side of the shed wouldn't matter because it would be against the wall.

 

There's no shortage of room for everything else and you don't have to reach as far.

 

Quentin

[Siberian Snooper]

HiGordon,

 

Is it possible for the shed entry/exit road too be in the area of the purple to black interface, this would reduce the shunting moves required to get to and from the shed to the platforms. A lot of the London terminii sheds were some distance from the stations, so quite prototypical. This might lower the shed area slightly due to the gradient, but hopefully won't impact greatly on lower track clearances.

 

SS

[The Stationmaster]

The trick to running a running shed (sorry) is to have room to queue incoming engines short of where they do what they have to do - the present plan has that.  Beyond that the shed layout involves a lot of to-ing & fro-ing but the site makes that unavoidable - which might add to the operating headaches fun.  The big plus is that the layout will still work if the turntable is knackered for some reason although engines would have to go elsewhere to turn of course (it happened) in the real world.

 

The really big potential problem is only having access off one line and if that could be improved somehow it would help matters.

[gordon s]

Thanks guys, some useful input.  I've just got back from golf and will spend some time looking at the flow either tonight or tomorrow.  I won't go into detail at this stage, but I will pick up on a couple of issues, which are fundamental.

 

The shed building has to face with the open end on the left hand side as the back wall is bare and as such it will save a lot of hassle/rework by having the entrance from the left.

 

I did think of having the shed off the turntable but wasn't sure if that was good practice as if the turntable failed then all loco's on shed would be marooned unless there was an escape route.

 

Moving the access to the purple/black area would mean a facing turnout which I thought was a no/no.  Making it a trailing point would mean a reversal to get to the shed on the right hand side.  I'm not against that as such and it was interesting that that was one of the proposals to consider.  Thinking about it though, having a kick back would mean one reversal, but then every platform would be easily accessible, so maybe that's the answer.

 

As it stands every platform is accessible with two changes of direction which I felt was reasonable and I could live with that.  It might mean shunting back down the access lines, but that's not an issue with a single operator/engine in steam.  Multi trains running via multiple operators might get a little more interesting but I'm sure that some complex signalling could overcome that.

 

Don't start on signalling yet.  That joy is still to come.....:-)

 

There really is a huge space in that right hand corner and from an operators perspective, it will make it very easy to access the shed to poke a loco if required.  Of course in my perfect world that will never happen.......

 

The coaling stage requires two roads.

 

Lots of things to think about.  Dinner will be on the table in a few minutes, so I'll play around with some sketches and see what comes out.

 

Thanks again.  Very interesting.

[islandbridgejct]

Here's a plan of the layout with the goods area in blue and the shed in pink.  The black lines are ET terminus and platforms and should not be changed unless there is no alternative but a minor change.

 

shed_redesign.jpg

 

 

Loco road on the outside of the semi-circle all the way round from the turntable to the left side of the layout, accessed via a trailing crossover off the down main near the left wall, the idea being that any loco can reverse out of any platform onto the loco road, then run forward onto the tt. That might then have knock-on consequences for the shed layout, but would leave it where it is at the moment. It's probably easier to operate than the double reverse required to access the tt at the moment.

 

Just my 2p worth.

 

Alan

[The Stationmaster]

Loco road on the outside of the semi-circle all the way round from the turntable to the left side of the layout, accessed via a trailing crossover off the down main near the left wall, the idea being that any loco can reverse out of any platform onto the loco road, then run forward onto the tt. That might then have knock-on consequences for the shed layout, but would leave it where it is at the moment. It's probably easier to operate than the double reverse required to access the tt at the moment.

 

Just my 2p worth.

 

Alan

 

That is actually the best way of doing things in my opinion.  However it does have a slight disadvantage as there appears to be room for only a single line round the outside of the running lines which would make it difficult to work and not the safest arrangement in the real world.  However I would keep at least one of the present connections as a way in/out in the event of problems.