LNER4479 Posted November 24, 2014 Author Share Posted November 24, 2014 A positive success... but Harvey looks concerned .. had he spotted a sound fitted Type 2 on the track(!)... runs and hides! Hey - we had a Central Trains Cl.170 running at one point (also runs and hides 'cos in that case there was no excuse not to run a Type 2!) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted November 24, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) He probably thinks he's seeing things, with that big blue bunny in the background... erm.. the big blue bunny IS Harvey.. the Security rabbit!! Edited November 24, 2014 by Barry O Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 A pedant, especially one seeking a clip around the ear, might suggest that the "4x4" Atlantic would be described more nearly correctly as a "6x6", or should it in fact be a 6x10? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted November 24, 2014 Author Share Posted November 24, 2014 A pedant, especially one seeking a clip around the ear, might suggest that the "4x4" Atlantic would be described more nearly correctly as a "6x6", or should it in fact be a 6x10? Well, I was originally going to type 'four wheel drive' but I guess it is one of those already! At least you 'got' the reference. I'm also wondering how one would refer to the wheel arrangement? 4-4+2 perhaps? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted November 24, 2014 Author Share Posted November 24, 2014 I am trying to do my railway in strangely enough reverse timeline where steam has took over and electric and diesel are going. Well I approve of that! Anyway to the question at hand I would guess it would be a 4-4-2 unless the axle under the cab drives as well. The axle does just that - Graeme has installed a fiendishly clever geared drive train off the rear coupled axle. You should check out his thread on LNER Forum Love the layout. Can I ask, were the point all hand built. The reason I ask is because I am thinking of having a go at building my own points so I can remove the peco points which keep jamming up or not passing power into the sidings. Couple of comments above. Re the pointwork on Grantham, it is all Peco (code 100), apart from one plain crossing which I built up myself (from Code 100 rail and PCB sleepers). Have you ballasted your track? If not, then there should be no reason why the points jam up. If you HAVE ballasted, then odd pieces of ballast and / or glue can get in between the point blades and prevent them from working properly - that may also be (part) of the reason for power not passing into the sidings. As an alternative (for the power problem), you can fit a micro-switch which is activated by the tie-bar as you change the point and then use this to provide the power into the tracks beyond. I myself have not (yet) found it necessary to do this, although I get occasional frequent wagging of fingers and predictions of doom which means I might eventually have to. I find that regular cleaning of track and also the sides of the point blades and the inner side of the rail that they contact is usually sufficient for reliable operation. Being Code 100 helps as there is a larger contact area; for finer scale track then the switching approach is more or less essential (although I don't have any experience of working with such track myself). If you're building a layout and feeling brave enough then why not start your own thread on here? Either in this layout thread or in the help / advice area. There's usually plenty of helpful / friendly advice to be had on RMWeb. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) Anyway to the question at hand I would guess it would be a 4-4-2 unless the axle under the cab drives aswell. It does in this case. Atlantic with permanently but separately driven axle under cab: 4-4-2-0? 4-(4+2)-0? Or in the case of the model, with the drive to the rear wheels by gearing from the other coupled wheels, then it is actually six-coupled even if not visibly so. Unless there's a hitherto concealed rule of the Whyte notation to say that only wheels coupled visibly by rods and of the same size count as a coupled group, then I reckon is a plain and simple 4-6-0. Edited November 24, 2014 by gr.king 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Can we just call it the Grimsby Tractor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandbridgejct Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Well, if the leading wheels were located in the Eastern Atlantic, the drivers would be over the Azores, and the trailing wheels somewhere near Newfoundland, which by my reckoning would make it a Great Banker. A word of warning though, with all this talk about P1s and P2s, you're clearly embarking on a number sequence that will lead in very short order to P4. Slow down, before it's too late! (as the road safety ad used to say.) (Lovely pictures and an always enjoyable thread, thanks.) Alan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gerbil-Fritters Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 A word of warning though, with all this talk about P1s and P2s, you're clearly embarking on a number sequence that will lead in very short order to P4. I happen to have top secret photograph of an actual P4... hoping certain LNER buffs may build one in 1:76 scale Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memphis32 Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Doesn't that have a couple too many wheels? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memphis32 Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 A non-coupled couple, that is... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gerbil-Fritters Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Yes, probably should be a T2 really.... I think Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 I think you're making a Mountain out of a Mikado... (taken me all night to think of that one) Meanwhile...(!) in other news, the Peascliffe Tunnel board has been delivered to the Ormesby Hall winter work room for further development over the next few months. Paul (Bolton) produced a rabbit out of a hat with a well-on-the-way rendition of the Blue Bull pub in 1930's condition (he's found a lovely period picture of Grantham's Westgate which includes the pub - oops, sorry 'hotel' as it declares itself to be in those days). Craig (Thompson) is starting to get his head round a large tree and a copse for atop the tunnels. For my part, I have some signals to finish off then the main focus of attention over the winter will be the Nottingham fiddle yard (although I do need to knock up the portal for Gonerby tunnel (Nottingham lines) to keep the scenery work on track). Will try and take some pictures to illustrate all this but will otherwise be the spring now when the layout is back together again in one piece. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Can we just call it the Grimsby Tractor? Grimsby Tug? Gonerby tunnel? Is it Gonerby a long tunnel? Edited November 25, 2014 by gr.king 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Or perhaps I should wait and see. There's Gonerby Moor of it after all....... Edited November 25, 2014 by gr.king Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I'd stop now, or you're gonerby in trouble..... Is 'Grimsby Tug' some sort of euphemism? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinWalsh Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Is 'Grimsby Tug' some sort of euphemism? Some sort of service offered by "Ladies" outside the fish dock gates???????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Anotheran Posted November 25, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2014 Graham, It was really good to get a chance to talk to you while looking at mini Grantham on Saturday. I did see you briefly at Nottingham last year, but oddly you actually seemed to have more time to talk in the scrum of Warley! Whilst I am continually in awe of your signals (sadly none of my photos do them the justice that many other photos on this thread can manage) the thing that I keep coming back to is your scissors crossover. I've already taken some of your technique (using code 75) to close down the gaps on my DE layout. But having talked about the fact that you created the scissors from the standard Peco crossing and four points and got the track separation down to a prototypical 10' gap I think I need to see if I can take it the next step and get it down to a 6'. It's not a case of wanting to compete... just being inspired by your work, and while I have nowhere for the scissors to go at the moment I have an idea for a layout in the future that will need it The fact that your work is all Peco code 100 is incredibly inspirational. I often think about building some of my own track. But Grantham reminds me that there is still a lot further that I can take Peco! I'm very much looking forward to seeing the full Grantham at my home show of Stafford in 2016! Just noticed that my camera made the photo above to be 3379... shame I am exactly 1100 shots short! Kind regards, Neil 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) "Is 'Grimsby Tug' some sort of euphemism?" "Some sort of service offered by "Ladies" outside the fish dock gates???????? :O" I couldn't possibly comment. You'd have to ask that delightful "skint" female who was on the telly last night. Edited November 25, 2014 by gr.king Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I couldn't possibly comment. As long as it's not something you're planning to offer when you're sitting out the front of the MPD all lonely and you think we're not looking..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 Graham, It was really good to get a chance to talk to you while looking at mini Grantham on Saturday. I did see you briefly at Nottingham last year, but oddly you actually seemed to have more time to talk in the scrum of Warley! Whilst I am continually in awe of your signals (sadly none of my photos do them the justice that many other photos on this thread can manage) the thing that I keep coming back to is your scissors crossover. I've already taken some of your technique (using code 75) to close down the gaps on my DE layout. But having talked about the fact that you created the scissors from the standard Peco crossing and four points and got the track separation down to a prototypical 10' gap I think I need to see if I can take it the next step and get it down to a 6'. It's not a case of wanting to compete... just being inspired by your work, and while I have nowhere for the scissors to go at the moment I have an idea for a layout in the future that will need it Kind regards, Neil Hello Neil, Well first of all thanks for kind comments and good to talk on Saturday. I was quite hoarse by the end of the day! There were a gratifying number of people who were interested in the use of the Peco trackwork - some, dare I say it, inspired by it - which was after all the purpose of the demo. Having done the scissors modification in two places on Grantham (t'other one is down the south end) I concluded that a 6 foot gap wasn't possible - but don't let me stop you from trying! Dr G-F also mused over the same subject when I first aired it on this thread. I think you will be down to hand-building if you want to close it up much more. The problem (with the Peco approach) is two fold - firstly that I have hacked away at the short crossing about as far as you can before you start eating into the very fabric of the 'frog' (as we modellers call it); secondly that it you hack away much further at the point joining on to it then you start eating into where the outer rail starts to curve and thus risk the tracks going out of gauge. If you do 'crack' it (not literally I hope!) then do post the results for us to see. But perhaps best not go to Peco asking for a refund if you don't! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Anotheran Posted November 25, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2014 If you do 'crack' it (not literally I hope!) then do post the results for us to see. But perhaps best not go to Peco asking for a refund if you don't! I suspect I am on to a loser, but I'm keen on giving it a go. Playing with paper templates I think I can get down to 47 or 48 mm, which is getting close. But I like a challenge. I'll definitely post the result, good or bad. Though don't expect to see nice shiny track as I'm going to try to source some old second hand pieces for a first attempt! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted December 7, 2014 Author Share Posted December 7, 2014 (edited) OK, so back to the grindstone after the excitement of Warley... This is the post-Warley scene in the chapel model railway room. One board has been shipped off to Ormesby for some winter scenic work and the rest of the main station boards will remain packed away for a few months to allow ready access to the fiddle yard, which will now be the main focus of immediate attention. It's the Nottingham fiddle yard that needs all the work - this is all that exists of it at the moment (to the left). Adjacent lie 30 yards of Peco track, recovered from Gowhole and beyond are the first two additional boards waiting to be fitted. Meanwhile, what little stock is present on the layout at the moment is 'hutched up' out of the way! Boards are piano-hinged off the rear of the main fiddle yard boards, attached to 3 x 1 battening. Battening pieces are fixed to the underside to both brace the 9mm ply and form part of the supporting arrangement. Bracing pieces are fitted to swing out from the adjacent leg to provide a 45deg cantilever arrangement. And there we have it - 8 x 1 of new model railway real estate just waiting for some track to be added... Edited December 7, 2014 by LNER4479 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium coronach Posted December 7, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 7, 2014 You will need to buy a church hall to put that lot in when it is finished LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 It's a relief to see that both the position of the strap hinges and the presence of the cantilevers provide double insurance against the possibility of the Nottingham stock encountering a drop-leaf portion of the fiddle yard! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now