Wigmore - an 0-16.2mm narrow gauge layout.

[Arthur Budd]

As I intend to have some progress to show on my new layout in the coming weeks, I thought it was about time I started a thread. As the subtitle suggests, sticking with the idea of a generic naming policy for my layouts does introduce the possibility for confusion between the two but now I've started with the idea I suppose I'd better stick with it. Details of the other layout, which I shall henceforth refer to as WRS, can be found here. Wigmore Road Sidings

By the way, that is not a typo in the title line. This layout is going to be built using 00-SF standards with a nominal 16.2 mm gauge. More of this and other constructional decisions in a later posting.

For those interested, the thinking behind Wigmore and the fictional history of the narrow gauge line it represents can be found in the article I wrote for Narrow Lines some years ago and which is repeated here. Narrow Lines article

Surprisingly, I've only had a couple of changes of mind since I wrote that article. One minor change is to suggest that when Col. Stephens took over the line and closed the upper section, he decided that the name was no longer appropriate as no section of the line now went anywhere near the Clun Valley. After due deliberation he decided to keep it simple and re-named the line the "Wigmore and Leominster Light Railway "or W&L for short. The other change from the article is a bit more fundamental in that I've changed the published track plan completely. I did try out the one in the article by laying track templates on the boards and, quite frankly, it just didn't work. It was too cramped and with everything parallel to the baseboard edge it just looked awful. So I scrapped that idea and started hunting around for inspiration which I duly found in another well known 7mm narrow gauge layout. With a couple of minor changes and additions to enhance the operating potential I think it's a nice flowing track plan with lots of interest that should keep me going for some time.

This is the new track plan:



So, what progress have I made so far? Well, as I said in my WRS thread it was my intention to work on the P4 layout up to the wiring and full testing stage (which I did) and then put that away and concentrate on building and laying the narrow gauge track over the winter. However, for one reason or another, that timetable went right out of the window. But I've not been entirely idle over the winter months as I'm just coming to the end of an "interesting" loco build, of which more anon, and I've also spent some time over the recent spells of glorious weather outside, on the patio, building more stock from a collection of Chivers kits I've had put by for some time quietly waiting to come to the top of the "to do" pile.

Unlike WRS I decided not to build the baseboards myself ( the one aspect of this hobby I'm not too keen on) and bought them ready made from the son of a fellow Wessex Narrow Gauge Modellers Group member. There are three 4' x 2' scenic boards, all quite conventional 2" x 1" timber frames and Sundeala tops and a slightly smaller fiddle yard board with a ply top. As this layout is unlikely to ever venture very far from it's home in our smallest bedroom, weight was not a consideration and neither was speed of set up so the boards are joined together with nothing more high tech than ¼" coach bolts. The boards are raised up on short legs above the supporting units to allow easy access to the undersides for any adjustments to the point actuators etc. The photos show the boards in situ with the Templot track plan laid in place. The next job is to glue the cork underlay down and fix the templates down permanently. This seems like a very good job for this coming Friday!





The boards with the Templot templates laid in position.


Finally for this posting, I've attached a few photos of some of the stock that will, one day, be found trundling along the rural byway that is the Wigmore and Leominster Light Railway.



The line's pride and joy, "Countess" from a kit by Dorset Kits.



Quarry Hunslet.



"Sybil" from an original Link kit but with compensation and split axle pick-up.



The Quarry Branch Railcar Set.



The Works train.



Finally, the "interesting build", a Bagnall 0-4-2T from EDM Models.






 

[mudmagnet]

Good to see that you are making progress. The locos and rolling stock look very good as well.

The EDM Bagnall certainly looks the part. What do you mean by 'interesting build'?

[DLT]

Hello Arthur,

 

This is looking like an excellent project, I shall be following it keenly. The stock looks very nice as well, and I'm very interested to hear how you got on with the Bagnall kit.

 

Shame it wont be available for exhibitions, but that will make life a lot simpler from a constructional point of view. Will you be building your own track?

 

Best wishes,

Dave.T

 

PS Trackplan looks vaguely familiar...

[Arthur Budd]

Good to see that you are making progress. The locos and rolling stock look very good as well.

The EDM Bagnall certainly looks the part. What do you mean by 'interesting build'?

 

It was interesting on a number of levels but mainly because, although a seemingly straightforward design, there are a few pitfalls and areas where you need to think long and hard about what you are doing. It most certainly isn't a "shake the box" sort of kit nor would I recommend it to a beginner in etched kit building. Having said that, it was very satisfying to build; the body goes together very well and, once I sorted out the balance issues due to the wheel arrangement, I was able to get it to run very slowly and smoothly. Whether it will do so AFTER I've painted it and added the extra bits of valve gear that can only go on at the last moment if you want to dismantle it for painting, remains to be seen!

 

 

Hello Arthur,

 

This is looking like an excellent project, I shall be following it keenly. The stock looks very nice as well, and I'm very interested to hear how you got on with the Bagnall kit.

 

Shame it wont be available for exhibitions, but that will make life a lot simpler from a constructional point of view. Will you be building your own track?

 

Best wishes,

Dave.T

 

PS Trackplan looks vaguely familiar...

 

I wonder why that could be..........?

 

Yes David, you sussed me out immediately. The track plan is indeed a variation on Charmouth. I hope you don't mind. When I was looking for inspiration I remembered operating Charmouth at Shepton and decided that was what I wanted from my layout. I didn't want to slavishly copy your work so that's why I added the quarry branch and exchange siding for the mineral traffic and the bay for the quarry branch railcar set.

 

I will indeed be building my own track to 00-SF standards. I purchased a full set of the gauges some time ago and built a trial turnout to prove the theory that tightening up the gauge through the crossing nose reduces the gaps and improves the running, and it certainly seems to work. Again I will be following your example and will be building the track from a mix of wood and PCB sleepers as per Bridport. Unfortunately I managed to wipe the track plan from Templot after I had produced the only set of templates so, as I can't face going back to square one and doing it all again, I shall be building the track in situ rather than off layout on seperate templates.

 

Arthur

[martin_wynne]

Unfortunately I managed to wipe the track plan from Templot after I had produced the only set of templates

Hi Arthur,

 

Are you sure? Templot makes it very difficult to do that. Normally it creates a new file every time you save. To lose a file you have to specifically opt to overwrite it. Try searching your computer for .box files modified on the date printed on the templates.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Arthur Budd]

Hi Arthur,

 

Are you sure? Templot makes it very difficult to do that. Normally it creates a new file every time you save. To lose a file you have to specifically opt to overwrite it. Try searching your computer for .box files modified on the date printed on the templates.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

Hi Martin

 

I've searched through all my .box files without success. I think the problem arose because I was working on two different layouts at the same time and managed to "save" the narrow gauge layout under the P4 layout name. (They weren't known as Wigmore and Wigmore Road Sidings then, just Narrow Gauge and P4 layouts but I still managed to confuse myself somehow. It just goes to show that you cannot make anything foolproof - there's always a bigger fool just around the corner!) Naturally I've got the first versions of the NG layout saved but as this was the one I decided against they are not a great deal of use. It's not a great problem though as I did a few adjustments to the NG layout on the baseboards by simply printing new sections and literally cutting and pasting them in place. It's not particularly elegant but it works. After all, the templates are only a guide for track building. The accuracy comes from using gauges etc. during construction so I'm not too bothered about how the paper bits look. I still think Templot is a magical program and I'm sure you have to try very hard to be as incompetent in its use as I was so my comments shouldn't be taken as a criticism.

 

Regards

 

Arthur

[Arthur Budd]

Here are some of the construction decisions I have made over the lengthy gestation period of this layout.

Track: Handmade to a nominal 16.2 mm gauge, using a set of 00-SF gauges, from code 82 FB rail spiked to wooden sleepers . At every 5th or 6^th sleeper and also at critical points of the turnouts i.e. the crossing nose etc. the rail will be soldered to a PCB sleeper for strength. There will also be PCB sleepers at the baseboard joints. Obviously the 16.2 mm figure is only important at turnouts and the gauge can be allowed to widen on curves, especially the 90 degree curve. The track will be laid on a bed of 1/8 inch cork sheet giving an easily removable sub base where necessary to give clearance for the tie-bars. Turnout crossings are all at least 1 in 6 and the ruling radius on the main line is 30" on the 90 degree curve to the fiddle yard and about 24" on the quarry branch; other curves are much more generous. This is more than sufficient for existing stock but I might have a problem when I eventually get round to building the Slaters Leek & Manifold loco kit I have quietly maturing in the cupboard. I'm told if built as per the instructions the loco is a straight track only beast - we shall see.

Here's a photo of the trial point I built to test the 16.2mm gauge theory. So far it only has a temporary tie-bar but it works so well I'm going to use it on the layout as the loco shed entry. As it will be at the back of the layout and behind the platform I may well not bother replacing some of the PCB sleepers with timber.




Turnout operation: Following the experience gained from building WRS, the tie-bars will be made following Norman Solomon's method as described in MRJ and the turnouts will be operated by Blue Point devices actuated by steel rod pulls through the baseboard framing. For photos of such an installation see the WRS thread.

Couplings: Kaydee. I've been following the "Kaydee Dilemma" thread with a great deal of interest and I've come down on the side of manual uncoupling. Placing magnets around the layout does limit operational flexibility and I also don't like the necessary uncoupling shuffle. As this is purely a domestic layout the "Big Hand" effect isn"t really a problem. I shall leave the tails intact however just in case I change my mind as the years go by.

Control: Nothing revolutionary here, just straight DC only I'm afraid. I can't see any advantage to be gained on a layout such as this in the extra expenditure on DCC, much as I like the possibility of sound. Over the years I've invested quite a bit in buying good quality DC controllers and I find these, plus a carefully set-up chassis, gives me the sort of running that I want without the hassle of fitting chips to everything.

Fiddle Yard: Cassettes for both Main and Quarry Branch using the same low tech alignment and power transfer method as WRS.

That's it for now. I'll post again when I have some progress to show.