TRETHEVY, WAS BODMIN SR circa 1930

[N15class]

I have been pondering for sometime on this. I thought it was about time I did something about it. I was hoping to get the base boards done by Christmas 14 but have missed that deadline.

 

I had not realised that I had started my search on here a year ago. You can see some findings here.

 

I have decided to make all my own track to 31.5 gauge. I will also be building a test/photo plank. This will test my track building and scenery making, as I have not made a layout  for nearly 20 years.

 

The idea is to use the track plan for Bodmin but I have not decided as yet to use the buildings or make others selected from around the LSWR. I will be joining the South Western Circle once I can contact some by email, as they still seem to work on snail mail. I have run into a small dilemma about the sidings  at the Wadebridge end.

Here is my basic idea using Templot. I will be refining it as I get further into the project.

 

With the 2 sidings at the Wadebridge end I have it drawn as circa 1935. But I have a photo dated about 1932 with the two sidings and the one furthest from the running line, with a kick back siding, this was left in place from the removal of the turntable that was on this siding. I will need to see what I can do or what will work best. I have reduced these siding by quite a lot. But saying that the whole thing has been compressed lengthwise. It is a nice narrow layout anyway so nothing will be done there really.

 

I am waiting for some bits and pieces co come from the UK before I can go too far with this. I will though in the near future get some ply cut for the test track then I will be able to sort out the cutting list the layout.

 

This is what I have done for the test plank. I am undecided about the points for this. The layout will be using A6. I was going to use B6 but according to Templot these are a smaller radii.  I am thing about using for the test B5. I really need to know what is closest to Peco ones for this testing plank. No I am not going to use Peco ones as it is also a learning process for building.  Well here is my simple design. it will 2.4m long by 225mm wide. Any thoughts on this would be much appreciated.

 

 

 

Well that's it for now. I just need to get into gear and make some things happen.

Edited June 4, 2021 by N15class

[Simond]

Peter

 

seeing your loco builds, I'm sure you'll have no problems.

 

I'm surprised that an A6 has a tighter radius than a B6 - I need to look at that and think!  The Templot forum will provide lots of support and suggestions, and IIRC, Martin has actually done Peco points in all "standard" gauges - you should be able to download the BOX files.  Not sure where exactly, but surely from the forum.

 

If you've seen my recent posts, you'll see that I have also gone for 31.5mm, as is Martyn 3-link.

 

watching with interest

Simon

[pwr]

I'll be following this one

Paul R

[two tone green]

+1

[N15class]

Peter

 

seeing your loco builds, I'm sure you'll have no problems.

 

I'm surprised that an A6 has a tighter radius than a B6 - I need to look at that and think!  The Templot forum will provide lots of support and suggestions, and IIRC, Martin has actually done Peco points in all "standard" gauges - you should be able to download the BOX files.  Not sure where exactly, but surely from the forum.

 

If you've seen my recent posts, you'll see that I have also gone for 31.5mm, as is Martyn 3-link.

 

watching with interest

Simon

I am going by the radius information on screen when you pick a turnout template.

 

I will look at the forum I am as yet not a member.

 

Thanks I will see if I can find the Peco download on there.

[N15class]

While I was in Wadebridge over Christmas I went to the site and took a whole load of photos of the site. Unfortunately the place has been completely devastated. Fortunately a lot of the surroundings are still the same.

 

 

The old gas works is now the fire station. As you can see part of masonry for the gasometer  is there. I thought it may of been for one of the oil tanks, but I feel the diameter is large for that.

 

This is the now few towards the what was the overbridge and the gaol. I was surprised how much the ground actually drops away, I will make sure I get the running line on the model to do so too.

 

 

Unfortunately the cottges at the bridge end have got this ghastly fence around  them.

 

 

The next two pictures are of the row of cottages at the end of the platform. My niece actually lives in one of these. These have not changed very much apart from the changing of the front and rear of them. This side is now the front.

 

 

The bank by the goods shed is also higher than I imagined, which is nice as it will give the layout some height variations.

 

 

The final picture shows the row of houses behind the station. I think the stone ones on the right are newer. I will need to do some more checking. I presume one of these would of been the station masters house. As they are similar to the one in Wadebridge.

 

 

The visit gave me a great feel for the site. In some ways it feels quite claustrophobic with the cottages down one side and the bank on the other, which gets quite high towards the old turntable. It is not as long as visually as I thought it would be.

 

Back to the research.

 

 

[N15class]

I have done a little work to the Wadebridge end as it is in an aerial photo from 1932.

 

 

I an not so sure that it works so well, I may need to extend the length of the sidings it my make it work better. Also I am not sure whether it works or if it is just that my mind is not used to the change as yet.

 

The one thing I have noticed I can't say I have seen any facilities for domestic coal. Unless it was from the gas works. There certainly was non in the yard. Except maybe in my model.

[Donw]

I think there must be some confusion about the radius according to the tables I use the A6 has greater radius than the B6. The A6 has a sharper radius at the switch end. A&B type semi curved switches have a straight planned secction A at 1:24 B at 1/32 the rest of the switch blade is curved. Because the A starts sharper the Curved part of the closure railis slightly less sharp than on a B switch in either case the Switch part is never less radius than the curved part. The bit that is tighter is the planned part but that is very short.

 

Full size the A switch has to be taken slower than a B switch due to the central forces involved in changing the direction of a loco. In our models this is much less of a problem. I believe full size all LMS loco were expected to be able to tranverse an A switch.

 

An A7 turout is called a natural because the Switch radius and the closure radius are the same.

 

Regards Don

[martin_wynne]

I am undecided about the points for this. The layout will be using A6. I was going to use B6 but according to Templot these are a smaller radii.

 

Hi Peter,

 

"A" switches are not used in running lines, and the GWR (and BR(W) ) didn't have one, preferring their older type of loose-heel switch.

 

"A" switches have a sharp 1:24 deflection, making them suitable only for yards and sidings.

 

A B-6 is not a common prototype size, but it is the shortest turnout which can be used in models and still look like a running-line turnout. As Don explains, the internal turnout radius between the heel of the switch and the crossing is actually smaller than in an A-6. Nevertheless a B-6 is a much better choice for model running lines than an A-6. The easier 1:32 deflection of the "B" switch provides in effect a transition curve, and much smoother running into crossovers and other connections.

 

Templot starts up set to a B-6 turnout for this reason.

 

My advice would be not to use "A" switches except in yards and sidings, unless space constraints make it unavoidable.

 

See also: http://templot.com/martweb/rea_a_or_b.htm

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Donw]

While I agree with Martin in regard to looks, the 1:24 planning gives an effective radius of about a scale 250ft which equates to 1.75m which is ok with most Branch line stock the remainder of the switch radius is nearly 500ft  or 3.5m in 7mm. reducing to approx 2.2m in 7mm along the closure. Typically in a terminus layout the passenger line is straight or at a gentle angle with the turnout leading to sidings and the run around so if short of space I would recommend an A6. I have used an A5 but found it rather tight and would suggest a minimum of A5.5.

Obviously given sufficient room the B6 will look much better.

If you have a case where the passenger trains go over a crossover (double track terminus) I would suggest even a B6 is tight due to the reverse curve effect in a crossover and would suggest a pair of B7s will avoid coupling problems (and the unsighly wiggle) of long bogie stock.

 

Don

[N15class]

Hi Peter,

 

"A" switches are not used in running lines, and the GWR (and BR(W) ) didn't have one, preferring their older type of loose-heel switch.

 

"A" switches have a sharp 1:24 deflection, making them suitable only for yards and sidings.

 

A B-6 is not a common prototype size, but it is the shortest turnout which can be used in models and still look like a running-line turnout. As Don explains, the internal turnout radius between the heel of the switch and the crossing is actually smaller than in an A-6. Nevertheless a B-6 is a much better choice for model running lines than an A-6. The easier 1:32 deflection of the "B" switch provides in effect a transition curve, and much smoother running into crossovers and other connections.

 

Templot starts up set to a B-6 turnout for this reason.

 

My advice would be not to use "A" switches except in yards and sidings, unless space constraints make it unavoidable.

 

See also: http://templot.com/martweb/rea_a_or_b.htm

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

While I agree with Martin in regard to looks, the 1:24 planning gives an effective radius of about a scale 250ft which equates to 1.75m which is ok with most Branch line stock the remainder of the switch radius is nearly 500ft  or 3.5m in 7mm. reducing to approx 2.2m in 7mm along the closure. Typically in a terminus layout the passenger line is straight or at a gentle angle with the turnout leading to sidings and the run around so if short of space I would recommend an A6. I have used an A5 but found it rather tight and would suggest a minimum of A5.5.

Obviously given sufficient room the B6 will look much better.

If you have a case where the passenger trains go over a crossover (double track terminus) I would suggest even a B6 is tight due to the reverse curve effect in a crossover and would suggest a pair of B7s will avoid coupling problems (and the unsighly wiggle) of long bogie stock.

 

Don

Thanks to you both. You have given me lots to think about. I do like how the B turnouts flow. I suppose at the end of the day I was pinching mm. If the layout grows by 200mm in length it is not the end of the world as the I cannot have it up as permanently. I am sure I have drawn it once with B6, but if not I will redo it and see what happens. 

 

I do like this hobby as each time you do something you have to learn a new set of rules etc.

 

Well I off to do some reading and drawing. Thanks again for the insight to the basics of track design.

[Donw]

Peter if you are interested in making it look right the is some value in using different sizes If the main turnout are B6 the use of an A6 or two in the yard will emphasise the different areas. Typically they would not be all the same full size

 

Don

[N15class]

Peter if you are interested in making it look right the is some value in using different sizes If the main turnout are B6 the use of an A6 or two in the yard will emphasise the different areas. Typically they would not be all the same full size

 

Don

I am looking at it at the moment. I think the run rounds I will use B6. Or maybe B7 I am doing some print outs to to do some comparisons. Then it will be down to some re work of the plans.

[N15class]

Having been given some advice by some more knowledgeable than I on the subject of track. My design I suppose was done grabbing millimeters here and there.

 

So I did a few plans of cross overs just to get the feel of the turnouts and to get an idea of size.

 

The first picture shows from top to bottom A5.5, A6, B6, and B7. My original plan used A6. The difference between this and the B6 is about 80mm, with five of these involved in the running line and run around this equates to an extra 240mm. Which I suppose is not a lot, when the layout is already 3.5 metres to long for my room. 

 

 

The following are shots looking along the the track to show the differences to how the point work flows. They are in the same order as above.

 

 

The B7 really looks nice, the only trouble is I would be out the window of the next room using them. With the track plan at Bodmin I will be able to A6 and A5.5 in the yard etc, which will extend a few bits which I think had suffered with the compression.

 

I am at the moment redrawing the layout and have to admit the B6 do look better. Just wish I like everyone else had more space.  I will post how it all goes once completed.

 

As an aside I have done my application to join the South Western Circle. This will mean that I can get the drawings for the buildings of the station. Whether it is these I will use is still unknown until I see them.

 

 

[daifly]

As an aside I have done my application to join the South Western Circle. 

Did my unacknowledged link on the Guild forum help you?

[martin_wynne]

The B7 really looks nice, the only trouble is I would be out the window of the next room using them. With the track plan at Bodmin I will be able to A6 and A5.5 in the yard etc, which will extend a few bits which I think had suffered with the compression.

 

I am at the moment redrawing the layout and have to admit the B6 do look better. Just wish I like everyone else had more space.

 

Hi Peter,

 

You can shorten a turnout without changing the V-crossing angle by adjusting the crossing entry straight (SHIFT+F11 mouse action).

 

There is a video showing how that works here: http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=1058&forum_id=10

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[N15class]

Did my unacknowledged link on the Guild forum help you?

I not sure I managed to find an email address from somewhere. I have so many odd bits of information from various people, I am not sure where it cam from.

 

But thanks to all that helped.

 

Hi Peter,

 

You can shorten a turnout without changing the V-crossing angle by adjusting the crossing entry straight (SHIFT+F11 mouse action).

 

There is a video showing how that works here: http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=1058&forum_id=10

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Thanks Martin

 

I will look into that. I take it, it makes the radius tighter.

[hayfield]

Peter its a great shame when even nominal compression affects the look/operational side of the layout. The problem is that even modest stations covered a very large area which all but few have the luxury to have available. I have had some very a days on the Bodmin and Wenford railway. Bodmin General seems a nice little country branch line terminus, but I guess even this small terminus would take up plenty of room especially in 7 mm scale.

 

Then again what size turnouts to use, A5 for some is a large turnout !! When you start to take an interest in trackwork 7's and 8's are desirable. How you overcome such problems is up to what compromises are acceptable to you. All I can say is good luck

[N15class]

I have been messing with Templot again.

 

The layout has grown it is now 6m long.  I have now changed the running line and loop to B6. The others are A6 or A5.5.

 

You will notice I have actually move the turnout from the middle middle loop to the goods shed line. This is because I could not get enough length in the middle road is classed as a siding, and would only take few wagons this way it looks better to me. I am also not happy with the sidings at the Wadebridge end. I still may go back my original style on this and the redesign of siding come run round.

 

I know this is not true Bodmin but I feel it is getting close to being a very workable layout design. Any views would be gratefully received.

Edited February 8, 2015 by N15class

[hayfield]

Peter

 

I believe the operational part of the layout design is nearly as important as the looks. Obviously you do not want to go too far from the original design, but on the other hand it does have to work. In railway modelling more often than not we have to compromise as size is by the space available, and in real life stations were altered during their life time to cater for changing demands of both trade and stock design

[N15class]

Peter

 

I believe the operational part of the layout design is nearly as important as the looks. Obviously you do not want to go too far from the original design, but on the other hand it does have to work. In railway modelling more often than not we have to compromise as size is by the space available, and in real life stations were altered during their life time to cater for changing demands of both trade and stock design

Yes that is where the problems with the Wadebridge end come from. They say the turntable was removed in the early 1930's. There is a 1935 signal diagram showing the turntable road as a siding. I found a 1932 photo showing the table gone, the siding extended and the kick back siding still in place. But no sign of it in later pictures and no date to when the table went or the track changed to the later layout.

 

As I said I am unsure of the alteration I did on the third run round. I do want to keep the track as close as possible to the correct layout. but it has always been in my mind a layout based on Bodmin, not a direct copy.

[N15class]

Things are not at a stand still with this I am still playing with Templot. I am getting very close to the final design.

 

But what I have done is get a sheet of 6mm ply ripped up into 100mm widths so I can build the foundations for the test track, and see what boards can be made for the layout. I will be gluing two strips together to make up the packing between the frames. This is easier than trying to find some soft wood here. 2x1 here is about three times the weight of soft wood in the UK. Need to get used to working with odd size sheets too this one was 2200 x 1700

 

I will be going to the local builders to see what shelf brackets and clamps I can acquire, better get some screws too.

 

 

[Simond]

Peter

 

I've been thinking about the baseboards for my loco shed.

 

There seem to be a lot of wooden girder designs that use two strips of ply spaced with blocks of softwood every so far, and this is clearly a proven approach. It seems to me that a box girder approach would be stiffer for a given weight (and thus cost, more or less) of wood. I don't know whether you can get ply cut down to, say, 20 or 25mm width, and then make rectangular tubes. You won't screw them together, unfortunately, but they should be possible if glued.

 

I recall the "odd size plywood" from my time in India - I wonder if things are similar there - but I could get softwood strip.

 

I'm going to try with very thin ply - probably 4mm - spaced with 18x12 strip to make girders 100 high and 20 thick, glued & stapled.

 

HTH

Simon

[3 link]

Hi Guys,

 

I have used 6mm ply with a spacer block of 25x75mm softwood, this was the first time I had used this method and I must say that not only am I impressed with the rigidity but also there is hardly any sideways twist. If I was to start again I would say the 6mm ply and 25x75mm blocks were overkill, and like you say Simon 4mm ply should be quite adequate although I would probably go for say 25x50mm blocks over 18x12mm blocks as the larger block face area seems to be what gives the strength to stop any twist in the girders.

 

My baseboards are all open plan and even using 6mm ply the boards are still fairly lightweight if you need to move them.

 

ATB,

 

Martyn.

 

PS,   I thought I should add that all my girders are 100mm in height.

Edited February 28, 2015 by 3 link

[Simond]

Hi Martyn,

 

I didn't mean blocks, I mean strips running top & bottom of the girders all the way along to make a rectangular tube.

 

Must go to B&Q to see what they charge for slicing one of their sheets into strips.

 

Not today however. 57xx decoder programming done, not wholly satisfied, but better than it was. Might finish the drawings for the locoshed, and work out the shopping list.

 

And post the revisions to your wiring diagram!

 

And there's the rugby to be considered...