Sheffield Exchange, Toy trains, music and fun!

[Clive Mortimore]

So the Chuff-chuff and Brummmm-brum-brummMMMM session continues.

 

The loco left in Platform 2 is shunted into the pilot siding. I was quite surprised with this loco, I have no idea how long ago it last run, many many years, off it trundled without any stalling through a Peco code 70 slip. It is pure Tri-ang.

 

No sooner had the Brush 2 crew appilied the hand brake they were past by the BRCW 4 car unit on its way to Harrogate.

 

Before the next train some fiddle yard photos.

 

As you can see the traverser holds a four coach suburban train with loco or a five car DMU.

 

 

So if running a six car I need to line up the tracks and place the leading coach in the small area that will be behind the back scene, the loco staging.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dagworth]

Now you tell me   Platform three will still be longer but look out platforms one and two here come the six car DMUs.....................sometimes.

 

Edit....Was that for EMUs as well as Hastings sets, cos if only Hastings units then half of the coach dangling off the platform was for the engine not passengers?

Yes, it stayed that way once Hastings was electrified, the Ramsgates etc. also went from those platforms

 

Andi

[Clive Mortimore]

Next train is a six coach DMU made up from a 3 car Met Cam and a 3 car Derby.

 

Long trains do look good.

 

As you can see there is an overhang on platforms 1 and 2. Thanks to Mr Dagworth knowledge as a ex BR Driver, I might get away with it. 

 

A train from Manchester arrives.

 

Departing from platform 3 is a semi-fast to Bradford and Halifax. The guard before departure made sure that the passengers for Halifax were in the front two coaches only.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Clive Mortimore]

Small trains look right as well as long ones.

 

The local from Barnsley is seen arriving.

 

A Leeds train via Barnsley and Dewsbury departs from platform two.

 

 

Just before it is time to go home for tea the stopper from Huddersfield arrives with a LMS 2P hauling it. It must soon be withdrawn.

 

 

 

[uax6]

Clive, You may be able to get a the 6 car better on the platform if you reduced the gap between the vehicles, at present it's quite a jump between the cars!

 

Looking nice mind.

 

Andy G

[Andrew P]

Looking good Clive, its certainly a good way to do final planning mate.

[Clive Mortimore]

Clive, You may be able to get a the 6 car better on the platform if you reduced the gap between the vehicles, at present it's quite a jump between the cars!

 

Looking nice mind.

 

Andy G

Hi Andy

 

Cheers for the comment. I know the gap is standard RTR wide at the moment but looking at the worse for this, the Lima and Hornby Met Cam units with their huge couplings and under scale gangway connectors, I would at maximum reduce the over all train length by 1 3/8 inches if/when I was to couple them closer.

[georgeT]

Coming together nicely Clive, keep the pics coming...

[uax6]

Hi Andy

 

Cheers for the comment. I know the gap is standard RTR wide at the moment but looking at the worse for this, the Lima and Hornby Met Cam units with their huge couplings and under scale gangway connectors, I would at maximum reduce the over all train length by 1 3/8 inches if/when I was to couple them closer.

Which might just get that front door on the Met-cam onto the platform.... ;-}

 

It's nice to see some old stock running around and mixed with newer stuff. This has potential to be a real cracker Clive.

 

Andy G

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Clive,

I'd be inclined to extend the platform like this:

[Clive Mortimore]

Clive,

I'd be inclined to extend the platform like this:

Hi Peter

 

Thank you for your suggestion. I did consider doing something similar two things stopped me, the main one being I want to get the signals so they are working and the added complication of going through the platform put me off and I want to set up a test jig when I make the signals fully working and both legs being the same length will be an advantage. The second reason is my inability to cut things to size and squarely and a wonky gantry would look silly.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Would there actually be a gantry there Clive?

 

More likely individual signals on the platform ends - easier for drivers to see too.

 

Not to say that a gantry is "wrong" though, as Llandudno (as an example) had a very similar arrangement to Clive's.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Clive Mortimore]

Would there actually be a gantry there Clive?

 

More likely individual signals on the platform ends - easier for drivers to see too.

 

Not to say that a gantry is "wrong" though, as Llandudno (as an example) had a very similar arrangement to Clive's.

Hi Peter

 

When planning the signalling I did draw the diagram with individual signals as well as a gantry. The gantry won as it look more impressive, but in reality there would more than likely be 3 posts, one on each platform.

 

Another reason, the practical one, for the gantry was so that I could fit in a four coach suburban train with a loco each end. Had I placed the signals on the platform ends I would have had to have longer platforms (no worries about 6 car DMUs). Or shorter trains, a 3 coach train can look like a branch train. In not making the platforms longer it means all the point work is on one board and the lines between the throat and the tunnel are longer. I dislike seeing terminus stations that look like Ventnor where the trains have no run in.

[5BarVT]

Thank you for your suggestion. I did consider doing something similar two things stopped me, the main one being I want to get the signals so they are working and the added complication of going through the platform put me off and I want to set up a test jig when I make the signals fully working and both legs being the same length will be an advantage. The second reason is my inability to cut things to size and squarely and a wonky gantry would look silly.

 

Clive,

 

This is from memory about 35 years ago when I managed to persuade my training engineer to let me spend some time on the 'outdated technology' at Exeter. If a gantry like that was on a platform, the signal wires needed to pass through the platform and turn vertically up the leg. This would be done using a crank which needed access to be oiled and greased so there would have been quite a large hole in the platform boarded over with removable planks. Turning to your model, you would leave it mounted on the baseboard with both legs the same length and the same large hole. Once you were happy with it working you could then put the planking in (to stop your little people falling in).

 

I too have a Tri-ang Brush 2 (and Hymeks) and have kept away from code 75 track because I imagined the flanges to be too large. Are they OK or have you re wheeled it?

 

Paul.

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi Paul

 

Thank you for the information. I got the idea of the "cut-out" at the end of the platform from a photo but I cannot remember where. I could go for the wooden cover idea, the end of platform 8 at Kings Cross was wooden to allow access to the signals.

 

The class 31 in question is one I have no idea when, where or why I purchased it. It has been sitting on my to do shelf for ages. I know it was not part of the Hanging Hill fleet of nearly 30 Brush types 2s as they are still boxed up. I picked off the shelf as it was one not in bits or blue. I was very surprised it ran to start with and then when it went through the double slip without stalling I was :swoon: As I said earlier it is pure Tri-ang.

[richard i]

Or compromise, move the gantry forward a twitch, extend your platform a little bit and close couple the stock in the wright way. That should see you home and dry.

Richard

Ps how big is a railway sign? One that says for instance beware of trains?

[Clive Mortimore]

Or compromise, move the gantry forward a twitch, extend your platform a little bit and close couple the stock in the wright way. That should see you home and dry.

Richard

Ps how big is a railway sign? One that says for instance beware of trains?

Hi Richard

 

Look here thinking about a problem and finding a solution is not allowed, especially if it involves three things?

 

As for railway signs I don't think there was a standard size for such warnings, not even a standard message, as long as they were written in Sans Gill typeface.

[CloggyDog]

For NEM-pocketted stuff, NEM Kadees are a simple plug-in which works well - my Bachmann Cravens and Derby LW (2nd type) fleet has Kadees inter-unit and most have them at the outer ends too, Kadee #17, #18 and #19 are the ones to go for. The plug-in nature of NEMs means you can swap them around to get the optimum close coupling. Brings the corridors 'reet close' and buffers almost touching between 2 cab ends. At Aylsham show last Saturday, I also had the Gloucester DPU screw-coupled to a 'dummy' Bachmann DY LW (2nd type) and that worked well too - our curves are much the same as yours.

 

The other advantage of Kadees is that the units move as a unit, rather than a collection of loose-coupled cars.

 

I have some MJT suspended gangways and plan to have a trial with those on a bog-cart of some description, possibly a Limby Met-Cam with Kadees and sprung buffers.

 

Hi Andy

 

Cheers for the comment. I know the gap is standard RTR wide at the moment but looking at the worse for this, the Lima and Hornby Met Cam units with their huge couplings and under scale gangway connectors, I would at maximum reduce the over all train length by 1 3/8 inches if/when I was to couple them closer.

[westerner]

Many thanks Clive, I can now see why you end up operating rather than doing scenic work etc.

[5BarVT]

Clive,

 

Meant to add last time:

 

Hang ups about trains overhanging the ends of platforms is a relatively recent concern. As late as 1990 there was a Glasgow Queen St to Scarborough Summer Saturdays HST which hung out of the end of platform 6 by a coach and a half i.e. the first coach had no doors on the platform and the second coach only had one. 'Standing out' controls were provided to allow the signal to clear with the train beyond.

 

Paul.

[Clive Mortimore]

For NEM-pocketted stuff, NEM Kadees are a simple plug-in which works well - my Bachmann Cravens and Derby LW (2nd type) fleet has Kadees inter-unit and most have them at the outer ends too, Kadee #17, #18 and #19 are the ones to go for. The plug-in nature of NEMs means you can swap them around to get the optimum close coupling. Brings the corridors 'reet close' and buffers almost touching between 2 cab ends. At Aylsham show last Saturday, I also had the Gloucester DPU screw-coupled to a 'dummy' Bachmann DY LW (2nd type) and that worked well too - our curves are much the same as yours.

 

The other advantage of Kadees is that the units move as a unit, rather than a collection of loose-coupled cars.

 

I have some MJT suspended gangways and plan to have a trial with those on a bog-cart of some description, possibly a Limby Met-Cam with Kadees and sprung buffers.

Hi Alan

 

I will look into how to close couple the DMUs as the layout progresses. Thanks for the ideas.

[Andrew P]

Morning Clive, I've used Fleishmann between Bachmann units and they were very close. As has been said, with Kadees you can mix and match. On Glen Roy I had my Wagon Fleet with 17's on one end and 18's on the other for a good close coupling.

 

 

All the best Mate.

[Clive Mortimore]

No Chuffing and a Brummmming this weekend, too busy. I have been trying out how the houses at the back would look. The plan is to have them on the top of the cutting......might change my mind, they look good at the same level as the railway.

 

They are only paper mock ups but I have been downloading pictures of terrace houses in the Grimesthorpe area of Sheffield. Each street seemed to have a slight variation on the design of houses. I will be modelling each of my streets with a slight variation.

 

Richard's idea of having the houses angled has worked.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Clive Mortimore

[Andrew P]

Morning Clive, I always find mock ups and moving things around works for me, and it certainly has for you as well, it looks really good now.

[Clive Mortimore]

Morning Clive, I always find mock ups and moving things around works for me, and it certainly has for you as well, it looks really good now.

Cheers Mr P

 

I think the next stage is make the cutting and put them on it and see what it looks like. I can try various heights of cutting.

 

Now here is a tip for George, I am going to use my stock boxes to raise the height of the buildings. They are useful if not thrown away. 

Edited October 19, 2015 by Clive Mortimore