Belstone - N gauge branch terminus, ex North British

[Richard Hall]

I now have components for lineside fencing Mk3, but the thought of spending another evening on this job was more that I can bear right now.  So instead I started on one of the other problem areas - couplings.

 

I'm using Microtrains knuckle couplings, and on a steep learning curve with them.  There are some challenges in getting a system designed for big American bogie vehicles to work reliably with little four-wheeled short wheelbase British wagons.  After an evening of fettling the uncoupling reliability is much improved although not yet perfect.  The main issues being:

 

• Setup - height of the trip pin is absolutely critical, as is the positioning of the coupler box, which must be precisely on the vehicle centre line.
• Bobbling - the couplers have spring-loaded shanks.  When drawing a rake of small, light wagons , especially with a loco that does not run 100% smoothly, the wagons oscillate back and forwards against the springs which looks horrible. It also encourages self-uncoupling...
• Self-uncoupling - I reckon the MT couplers have been pretty finely engineered so as not to accidentally self-uncouple over the magnets, based on the drag and weight of an eight wheel bogie vehicle.  So when using four-wheelers it is always the last vehicle that self-uncouples, never any other.

I spent some time last night trying to address those last two issues on a handful of Peco-chassis wagons which were almost unusable. First I added weight, quite a lot, which made the bobbling worse without solving the self-uncoupling issue. So I started thinking about some kind of friction damping, the result being the Belstone Engineering anti-bobble spring.- a length of springy metal wire (in this case old Slaters handrail wire) bearing very lightly on the middle of one of the axles. Success! Although still some refinement needed, the springy wire needs very careful adjustment, and the treated wagons could probably do with some weight adding to ensure that the spring-loaded wheelset continues to rotate instead of dragging. And obviously you need to swap the Peco plastic wheelsets for ones with metal axles (I used Farish ones which fit fine). Strangely the only Farish vehicle I have fitted MT couplers to so far, a cattle van, doesn't seem to suffer from bobbling or self-uncoupling and I can't see why. It's a bit longer wheelbase than the Peco/Parkwood jobs, but surely not enough to make a difference?

 

Short wheelbase wagons also tend to skew sideways when being propelled with the couplers in the open (delayed uncoupling) position.  That's  a result of the massive clearances on N gauge wheel standards - put a 12 ton boxvan on the track and you can rotate it several degrees around its central axis.  The skew looks like a derailment waiting to happen, but that doesn't seem to be a problem. It just looks a bit weird.

 

If anyone is interested I might post up a few photos later, showing how I have fitted the MT couplers to various makes of vehicle.  The worst by far are Farish locos with NEM coupler pockets - MT don't make a coupler to suit these, and looking at how an MT coupler actually works I'm not sure it would be physically possible to make a plug-in NEM version. The NEM pocket is much, much shorter than the old spring-loaded Rapido version, and you end up having to chop away bits of chassis block to make room for the MT coupler box. I've only done one of my new Farish locos so far, it took two evenings and I'm still not happy with the result.

[Georgeconna]

Cracking looking layout mate, Very impressive!!

[John M]

It might be worth experimenting with the Microtrain "Truck Restraining Spring" part #1953 to control bobbling. The spring which fits over one axle end in an axlebox is intended to provide  some dampening action when coupling/uncoupling free moving cars.

 

I have used MT couplers both in N (American) and 3' Narrow gauge stock in 4mm. I avoid the T Shank drop in coupler like the plague and usually use the #1025 coupler in both scales for body mount applications. I found the T shank couplers that fit in a Rapido pocket difficult to set up correctly and keep in adjustment even on American N scale locos and stock.

 

I like the layout its a good example of the level of realism that can be achieved in N in a reasonable space.

[aac]

Thanks Ben, very kind of you to say so.  The grassy areas were painted brown, given a coat of diluted wood glue then sprinkled with a mixture of Woodland Scenics materials, mostly burnt grass and yellow grass fine turf, bit of light green coarse turf, very sparing use of dark green weeds and a few bushes.  I've possibly used slightly too much yellow grass but it looks OK under the layout lighting. Roads and platforms are covered in very fine sand (from the local pet shop, intended for lizards) then given a couple of coats of grey matt emulsion and a wash of very watery matt black emulsion to tone them down.  I find the 'tester' pots sold in DIY stores very useful.  I'm aiming to have everything on the layout matt and a bit weathered so nothing sticks out.  That includes vehicles:

 

 

Track I'm not so happy with although it doesn't look too bad in the photos.  I wanted to reproduce the fine ash ballast found on light rural branch lines in the steam era.  So I pressed modelling clay into the track, smoothed and levelled it, then tamped more lizard sand into it. Once the clay had dried I cleaned it all up and painted it with a mix of black, mid grey and dark earth. Unfortunately the sand didn't really 'take' in some places leaving smooth patches on the shoulders and cess area.  I used Woodland Scenics 'cinders' to try and rectify this, but it looked much too coarse. So I gave it another three (!) coats of black/grey/brown emulsion mix, and now none of my points work properly and all the flangeways are clogged with paint...

 

Richard

 

Nice layout.

 

Try cleaning the clogged points with a sharp tooth pick dipped in meths or white spirit. The wooden stick soaks up the liquid so it doesn't go everywhere. Rub it inside both faces of the rails where the blades make contact, and on the blade faces too - carefully so that you don't change the shape of the blade's curve.  Use a fine paintbrush for the pivot point of the blade and let a hair or two slide under the rail and gently rub that area with the bristles lightly soaked in the spirit. Once it seems okay, use a fine paint brush again and dip it in malt vinegar. Go back over where you have been cleaning and the vinegar will de-grease the slight oily residue from whatever spirit base you used. I avoid Q Tips for cleaning points as you are in danger of catching fibres that later decide to go inside your mechanism.    

[Richard Hall]

Not much time for modelling this weekend, but I made a start on working through the locomotives and rolling stock, almost all of which will need some kind of work. So at last I have a "correct" Border country engine, though not yet finished:

 

 

46474 was one of the Tweedmouth allocation of 2MTs in 1962 and turns up quite a lot in photographs of Borders branch lines. As well as renumbering and making a start on the weathering (not yet finished) I fitted Microtrains couplings (type 2004, rear very easy to do, front a nightmare and sits too far forward, but there's not a lot I can do about that).  This loco is not a great runner: although it crawls along beautifully at walking pace it becomes jerky at higher speeds.  I have another new 2MT which is the same. Maybe they just need running in. 

 

I also noticed that it is a bit short on adhesion. There really isn't a lot of space in the body for extra weight, but I replaced the steel weight in the boiler with lead, managed to squeeze a sliver of lead sheet in the space between the motor and the top of the firebox, and stuck a lead weight onto the cab footplate just below window level.  That obscures all the lovely cab detail, but you can't really see any of it on a 2MT anyway thanks to the tender cab.  All of this added around six grams, which doesn't seem a lot until you realise the loco and tender only weigh 41 grams to start with.  It is now less inclined to spin its wheels than it was.

 

It's a shame this one isn't a better runner as it is a lovely model to look at.  I'm really hoping it improves with some running in, but on a short end to end layout there isn't a lot of room for it to stretch its legs.

 

Also visible in the picture are a couple of my kit built wagons - I have about twenty of these, all a good few years old and mostly in need of new wheels, lettering and weathering.  I am slowly working through them, also adding weight, fitting anti-bobble springs and then tweaking the MT couplings.  What I don't have is a decent brake van - neither the Minitrix nor Peco 20 tonners that I have really cut it these days so I have an ex LMS Stanier brake on the way.  Once that is here I should be able to run Belstone's first proper branch goods train.

[Richard Hall]

My 'back story' for Belstone has fallen to bits, thanks to an article by Ian Futers in a very old copy of Railway Modeller.  I knew that the Central Northumberland Railway was intended to run from Scotsgap to Kelso via Rothbury, but I assumed it would head west from Rothbury up the Coquet valley to Alwinton, and then carve a path somehow over the Cheviots and get into Kelso that way, which would have required some pretty impressive engineering.  Turns out I was wrong: the CNR would have run from Rothbury to Thropton, Alnham (within a couple of miles of the spot where I have located Belstone), thence to Wooler, and north-west to Cornhill on Tweed to join the North Eastern line from Tweedmouth to Kelso.  The plans for the section north of Wooler were later revived by the North Eastern as part of the Coldstream-Alnwick branch.

 

So if the CNR had been built, and Belstone had existed, it would have been a through station on a line from Rothbury to Wooler. Not only that, it would probably have been a North Eastern branch with completely different style of station and signalbox. Arrghhh. This is what happens when you try to build a historically accurate model of an imaginary place. That way madness lies.

[Black Sheep]

But what if a land owner prevented the building of the CNR in the way it actually happened and so was built in the way you assumed?

 

Your fiction then becomes what might have been

[Richard Hall]

Back story revised:

 

1863 - Central Northumberland Railway authorised

1867 - plans for section north of Rothbury abandoned

1870 - line opened

1872 - taken over by North British Railway

 

So far, all true. The next bit isn't...

 

1877 - NBR authorised to build line from Burnmouth (ECML) to Rothbury via Wooler and Belstone to connect with CNR. Two aims - build a back door route into Newcastle, and put a spanner in the works for the North Eastern which is looking at building a line from Alnwick to Coldstream via Wooler and thence to Kelso and into the heart of NBR territory.

 

1879 - Tay Bridge collapses, NBR in crisis. Directors take a long hard look at plans, realise that the Rothbury branch is too lightly constructed to take any worthwhile traffic without total rebuilding and bin the idea of a through route.  The planned new line is abandoned south of Belstone.

 

1883 - line opened, getting the NBR into Wooler four years ahead of the NER.

 

I think that works.

[Richard Hall]

Not much modelling time this week but I have been picking away at various small jobs, and today I finally worked up enough enthusiasm to tackle the lineside fencing. This is definitely the last time I model a railway company which used post and wire fencing.  In the end I took 1.5mm square brass tube, glued a strip of thin Microstrip to one face and notched it with a razor saw at the correct spacing for the fence wires.  About one in eight posts were made this way, the rest were a mixture of 1.5mm square spruce, pairs of 2mm Assoc PCB sleepers glued back to back, and a small number of posts cut from balsa sheet when I ran out of everything else.

 

I drilled holes at around 15mm intervals, injected wood glue into them with a syringe, inserted the posts (mostly vertical, but NBR fencing was a bit ramshackle so I wasn't too worried about having them all perfectly aligned) and left them for the glue to set. I then painted the posts matt grey. Finally I took some 'invisible' nylon thread, tied a loop in one end, tied it round the first end post, then ran it along the posts looping it once around each of the notched ones. At the far end I wound it twice round the post and secured it with a spot of cyano.  I had planned to have four strands of wire, but had not made enough allowance for the uneven ground and was starting to run out of fence post height in a couple of places after three strands.  So I decided three was enough - you can barely see the wires anyway, which is exactly what I was trying to achieve.

 

I have also been working slowly through my stock.  46474 is now pretty much done (and filthy) and my new Farish brake van has MT couplers and a good coat of dirt and gunge. Were the underframes on unfitted ex LMS brake vans really grey? Farish seem to think so. My weathering technique is a bit rough and ready like most of my modelling but I think it looks OK from a distance.

 

So here are a couple of shots of 46474 departing Belstone with the thrice-weekly goods train - the revenue from which probably just about covers the cost of the coal in the Ivatt 2MT's tender. Now I have broken the 'modellers block' of that fencing I can get on with my life. I've decided to deal with the scenery by starting at the back and ends, then working forward and in. So the station platform and building will be next on the list. 

 

 

[Richard Hall]

And another thing - that backscene. I'm starting to think it might be a little too dramatic, and not quite right for the location.  It wouldn't bother me enough to do anything about it, except that I screwed up on preparing the backscene boards, and now the backscene is peeling away from the boards everywhere and will need to be completely redone.  Originally I used 'ID Backscenes' pack 208A, but I'm thinking their 208NA might be a bit more subtle http://www.art-printers.com/backscenes%20n%20gauge%202.htm

[Richard Hall]

Sidetracked? Not half.  In the end I got so frustrated with the MT couplers that I decided to have a go at designing my own.  I ended up with a tension-lock design with a fixed shank, with delayed uncoupling, using flat bar magnets at sleeper height. Can be made to fit NEM pockets, T-shanks or attached direct to the chassis on vehicles with no pockets at all (like all the wagons I butchered to fit the MT couplers). After several months of fiddling I have finally got it to work (pretty much) and you can see the results in this short video, starring a hesitant J39 and the Hand of God. So nil progress on the layout itself, and I'm starting to realise just how bad some of my trackwork is.  Do I carry on with the scenic work, or start again?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRXK8v2w0iE

[Black Sheep]

well, your couplings are proving to do the job in that video,

 

I was thinking of playing around with DG couplings but being put off by not being able to fit them into NEM pockets (to avoid cutting up newer stock)

 

I'd be interested in a closer look at your couplings if you've got a separate thread for them or just in here?

[Richard Hall]

I'd be interested in a closer look at your couplings if you've got a separate thread for them or just in here?

I'll try to take some photos this evening of the little beasts in operation. Still a fair amount of work to do, mostly around making them easier to assemble and fit. Having taught myself to use CAD for the etched frets, I have a feeling I might now have to learn 3D CAD as well.

[Richard Hall]

Coupling fitted to one end of a Farish 12 ton van:

 

 

 

 

Vehicles pushed together over magnet, draw bar rises to contact underside of delay bar.

 

 

Vehicles drawn apart slightly, lifting loops rise to fully up position above delay bar

 

 

Pushed back together, lifting loops are now above delay bars and vehicle can be propelled without recoupling.

 

Magnets are inexpensive neodymium flat bars at sleeper height.  I'm now working on 'productionising' the design to make it quicker and easier to assemble and fit.  Should be finished in time for Christmas.

[Black Sheep]

Are they any longer than the standard rapidos?

 

Will your 'production' version fit NEM pockets?

 

I had been looking at the DG (as beloved by the 2mm association chaps) but not confident it can cope with tight curves due to having a buffing bar instead of a hook - the hook making the point of contact narrower and better able to articulate.

[Richard Hall]

Are they any longer than the standard rapidos?

 

Will your 'production' version fit NEM pockets?

 

I had been looking at the DG (as beloved by the 2mm association chaps) but not confident it can cope with tight curves due to having a buffing bar instead of a hook - the hook making the point of contact narrower and better able to articulate.

 

Spacing between vehicles is about the same as Rapidos, it can't be much shorter as the pivot point needs to be clear of the front of the coupler pocket.  I'm working on a 3D printed NEM compatible shank - I've made a couple of NEM clip-fits by cross drilling the shank for a wire pin and filing the top and bottom of the shank, but it's fiddly.

 

I think tight curves are going to be the weak spot of this design as well, especially on four wheeled vehicles with long end overhangs (VBA, OBA, CCT etc). The problem isn't just the design, it's the massive amount of clearance in N gauge wheel standards which allows the vehicle to skew sideways on the rails when propelled. I'm still tweaking the drawbar dimensions to stop the end catching under the adjacent buffer head on left hand curves, but I can't make it too narrow otherwise the coupler bars snarl up.  Oleo and oval buffers could be a problem. All tricky stuff.  I'm using Peco medium radius points which are fine, but haven't tested the design on anything tighter yet.