Talyllyn Junction. The Station area has been started!

[Simond]

4mm intrusion ?!?

 

Apart from the hideous tension locks, modern 4mm RTR (I assume...) looks pretty good.

 

When you compare it with what was available in the 60's & 70's...

 

Nice weathering!

Simon

[Jintyman]

And just a little update on the 7mm side.

 

The turnout has been started for the two sidings against the Merthyr line. Although the line was double track from here to the East junction of the triangle, the inner line was treated as one long siding.

 

I just about had enough 12" sleeper strip to complete this, I made it with just 160mm of a 300mm strip left!!!!!

 

I made up the crossing vee unit, glued it in place after soldering a wire to the unit for polarity switching. I've then fitted the stock rail one side, also attaching a wire underneath the rail for feed purposes.

 

 

 

I'll get on with the rest of it over this week.

I still haven't weathered that Fruit D, it keeps avoiding the brushes, but not for long.

 

Jinty

[muddys-blues]

Looks good on the pics Jints ..... I shall inspect it with closer scrutiny on Wednesday though ..... tea, strong, just milk please 

 

Best regards

Craig.

[MarshLane]

Hi Jinty,

Thanks it was me that asked for the photos!  I've got a business trip away next week, but once I'm back its onto baseboards, I'm eager to get cracking, and that brings with it the first opportunity/occasion/dreaded moment* (delete as applicable!) to put the first pointwork down for the shed area.  Wish me luck!

 

Your photos are helping point me in the right direction (excuse the pun) so thanks for that.  How are you sticking your sleepers to the template ... i tried with carpet double-sided tap on the first go at straight track, but think its too sticky!  Was thinking prit-stick may be the option?  Be interested to hear how you do it.  Also, do you mind if I ask how you've done your vees?  Im assuming the check rails either side are just bent to match the template?

 

Rich

[Jintyman]

 

Your photos are helping point me in the right direction (excuse the pun) so thanks for that.  How are you sticking your sleepers to the template ... i tried with carpet double-sided tap on the first go at straight track, but think its too sticky!  Was thinking prit-stick may be the option?  Be interested to hear how you do it.  Also, do you mind if I ask how you've done your vees?  Im assuming the check rails either side are just bent to match the template?

 

 

You're welcome.

 

As for sticking the sleepers to the template I'm using double sided tape from the local craft shop. I build my trackwork in situ so there is no need to remove the template, I just ballast over. So I'm not sure which is best as a low tack tape, and not sure if a Pritt Stick would work.

 

Now the crossing vee's are built up as one unit which includes the wing rails as they are an important part of the turnout. The crossing vee unit standing on its own in the last picture is held together by thin plates of brass and soldered together. I make up the vee utilising the Brian Harrap method of folding a piece of rail on itself, soldering it together and then cutting and filing it down to a vee.

 

I have a few more crossing vee's to make, so if I get time I will do a 'show & tell' type thing with pictures to show the process.

 

Jinty

[Simond]

Link to my last pointwork build

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/79052-porth-dinllaen-in-0/?p=1846473

I recall there was a show&tell by Heyside & some useful stuff on WT, I'll edit links into here for convenience, assuming I can find them!

 

The links are in David's other thread on points and crossings!

Best
Simon

Edited June 27, 2016 by Simond

[PjKing1]

Rich/Jinty I've used pritt-stick on ELJ an it works great you can get an extra strong one to but the normal one is fine

 

Hope that helps

[philip-griffiths]

And just a little update on the 7mm side.

 

The turnout has been started for the two sidings against the Merthyr line. Although the line was double track from here to the East junction of the triangle, the inner line was treated as one long siding.

 

I just about had enough 12" sleeper strip to complete this, I made it with just 160mm of a 300mm strip left!!!!!

 

I made up the crossing vee unit, glued it in place after soldering a wire to the unit for polarity switching. I've then fitted the stock rail one side, also attaching a wire underneath the rail for feed purposes.

 

 

Tally 082.jpg

 

I'll get on with the rest of it over this week.

I still haven't weathered that Fruit D, it keeps avoiding the brushes, but not for long.

 

Jinty

 

 

Jinty

 

are you giving yourself enough space for the catch point between the siding and the double-single line cross over?

 

See http://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/gwp/S2303.htm

 

regards

[Jintyman]

Jinty

 

are you giving yourself enough space for the catch point between the siding and the double-single line cross over?

 

See http://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/gwp/S2303.htm

 

regards

Whoops!!!!

Thanks for that, I'll have to move things back a few inches so I can fit it in.

 

Thanks for the rescue before I'd got too far. I can't recall seeing it in any photos either. Oh well not a major disaster, I will ammend it later.

 

Thanks again

Jinty

[Jintyman]

Well after spending about 2 hours last night, pondering over the catch point that protects the double junction from wayward movements, I have come to the conclusion that I just can't fit it in to the geometry without making some major adjustments to the double junction. It may just be 4", but I just haven't got the space available for it.

I thought about just making a representation of one between the existing heel of the crossover turnout and the toe of the turnout I'm just building, but I think it would look silly, and considerably worse than nothing at all. 

 

So I'm going to have to leave it out (as much as I'd like to utilize it) and carry on. Now I know that it makes it more un-prototypical but we modelers are constantly compromising along the way, and this is just another compromise. Going back to the double junction, there was never a 3-way within it, but I've had to compress one in to get the siding as long as I needed.

I don't personally think that the lack of the catch point will make my representation of Talyllyn Junction any less 'believable', I think that the main features are all there, It will just lack being 100% accurate (as it already does).

 

If anyone can suggest any other approach, I'd like to hear it. My constraint remember is that I can't push the siding turnout any further towards the camera in the pictures due to limitations for stock in the hidden section behind the camera. And I certainly can't alter the double junction. The turnouts of the crossover are rather large in radius but that is so sweeping curves can be had.

 

Thanks again to Phillip who pointed it out to me.

 

Jinty

[Simond]

David

 

I'm sitting on a plane so unable to check, but I have seen several examples of check points incorporated in other crossing work - I'm not sure if this would help in your case but if it might, I'll look for references when I'm back.

 

Best

Simon

[martin_wynne]

Hi David,

 

You can easily put catch point(s) within the turnout.

 

Here's a pic. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/95609-unusual-pw-configurations-thread-both-real-and-model/page-6&do=findComment&comment=2079724

 

If you post your .box file I will do it for you.

 

Martin.

Edited June 28, 2016 by martin_wynne

[Jintyman]

Thanks Martin,

That seems very straight forward and thank you for the assistance. I will have a go myself first if I may, and if I have trouble with it I will take you up on your kind offer.

Looks like a good solution to me. Thanks again

 

Regards

Jinty

[martin_wynne]

Hi David,

 

Alternatively, here's a pic showing how close you could get a catch point into the back of the crossing on your crossover:

 

 

It wouldn't really be protecting the running line in your case, but it would at least match the signal box diagram.

 

If necessary you could almost certainly shorten the lead of the turnout you are building, to make room for a catch point. Put the peg on CTRL-4 and then try the SHIFT+F11 mouse action on it, keeping an eye on the radius.

 

Martin.

Edited June 28, 2016 by martin_wynne

[martin_wynne]

Hi David,

 

Looking again at your photo, on reflection I'm not sure that catch points within the turnout are going to protect the running line -- there doesn't look to be enough clearance.

 

A better and more prototypical solution would be to put a catch point in each of the sidings beyond the turnout.

 

Sorry to be dithering on this, but without your .box file it is impossible to be sure.

 

Martin.

Edited June 28, 2016 by martin_wynne

[Jintyman]

Thanks for your input Martin. I will send over my box file to you later after I get home from work.

I thought about 2 catch points, one in each siding, but I thought that it wouldn't be prototypical.

 

Jinty

[The Stationmaster]

Well after spending about 2 hours last night, pondering over the catch point that protects the double junction from wayward movements, I have come to the conclusion that I just can't fit it in to the geometry without making some major adjustments to the double junction. It may just be 4", but I just haven't got the space available for it.

I thought about just making a representation of one between the existing heel of the crossover turnout and the toe of the turnout I'm just building, but I think it would look silly, and considerably worse than nothing at all. 

 

So I'm going to have to leave it out (as much as I'd like to utilize it) and carry on. Now I know that it makes it more un-prototypical but we modelers are constantly compromising along the way, and this is just another compromise. Going back to the double junction, there was never a 3-way within it, but I've had to compress one in to get the siding as long as I needed.

I don't personally think that the lack of the catch point will make my representation of Talyllyn Junction any less 'believable', I think that the main features are all there, It will just lack being 100% accurate (as it already does).

 

If anyone can suggest any other approach, I'd like to hear it. My constraint remember is that I can't push the siding turnout any further towards the camera in the pictures due to limitations for stock in the hidden section behind the camera. And I certainly can't alter the double junction. The turnouts of the crossover are rather large in radius but that is so sweeping curves can be had.

 

Thanks again to Phillip who pointed it out to me.

 

Jinty

 

This might give you some ideas - quite a common arrangement as it happens -

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/image/22637-engine-shed-at-bodminjpg/

[Jintyman]

Firstly thanks must go to Martin and Mike (Stationmaster) for their input on my problem. They gave me the solution and it was, I believe, quite straight forward.

 

Martin, apologies for not sending the boxfile over, but I felt I could solve the problem by eye, rather than you go to the trouble of setting the catch point into my turnout, and I didn't really want to shorten the turnout either, as I thought it may spoil the flow.

 

I decided to give it a try by eye, as mentioned above, and I think I've succeeded.

 

Here are a few pictures............

 

With the catch open for traffic:

 

 

 

With the catch closed to protect:

 

 

 

I feel comfortable with it, the blades do open slightly more but the weight was pushing the track upwards on its template. Once glued down, a Cobalt will actuate the catch point and it will be linked with the Cobalts that operate the crossover, thus creating a prototypical arrangement.

 

Here is a lower shot, all that's left on this turnout now are the check rails which I'll do tomorrow evening.

 

 

Comments are always welcome

 

Jinty

[The Stationmaster]

Jinty that is JLTRT  - looks very nice

[martin_wynne]

Hi Jinty,

 

That looks good. Have you tried making it derail a vehicle, and checking that the vehicle stops clear of the running line on the left?

 

Martin.

[Jintyman]

Hi Jinty,

 

That looks good. Have you tried making it derail a vehicle, and checking that the vehicle stops clear of the running line on the left?

 

Martin.

 

Hi Martin,

 

Yes and yes. Once the vehicle is derailed it is clear of the main running lines.

 

Another question if I may?

Is there any protection offered to the timbers, chairs or rail that may be damaged with a derailment, maybe sand, metal plate, etc?

 

Jinty

[The Stationmaster]

Hi Martin,

 

Yes and yes. Once the vehicle is derailed it is clear of the main running lines.

 

Another question if I may?

Is there any protection offered to the timbers, chairs or rail that may be damaged with a derailment, maybe sand, metal plate, etc?

 

Jinty

 

No.  If the derailment is on point timbers or timber sleepers the worst you usually get is some scoring  - years ago I was visiting a normally switched-out signalbox  and it had a slotted joint catch point just in advance and something caught my eye near it - I went over to have a look and found clear derailment marks of a fairly heavy wagon that had obviously dropped back through the catch and had then simply rerailed itself as the train started away, i.e. it had rolled off and was pulled back on.

 

I attended a derailment at Llandarcy (late 1973) where a loaded 45 ton tank car had run away and gone through the trap - the worst damage was some scored sleepers and it didn't even cut the track circuit interrupter (which was simply a cable).  Alas the shunter who was assisting didn't listen to my instructions and once we'd moved it by lengthening the coupling with a fishplate he didn't scotch the wagon before the coupling slackened and the fishplate fell out and it ran away for a second time - duly derailing about 2 inches from where it had landed the first time; just a few more wheel marks on the sleepers and nothing broken.

 

Overall timber sleepers in reasonable condition and preferably with something like ash, dirt or stone dust instead of ballast are fairly good at stopping a simple wagon breakaway with minimal damage to vehicle and infrastructure.  Run an engine through, especially 100 tons of 6 wheel bogied diesel, and you'll probably get a few broken chairs and some more heavy scoring on the sleepers but not much worse if you're lucky and it was a slow speed move that stopped quickly.  Put down steel plate and that would be the end of it when a wheel lands on it and it won't have any braking effect at all.  And not that you need worry about it but a derailment on concrete sleepers will simply smash them

 

If there's a chance of a faster runaway - especially a catch point on a very steep gradient close to a station or pointwork or a trap where a train might approach under power, then a form of sand drag might be used but I've seen one that was totally ineffective when several hundred tons of coal train and loco just sailed through it as if it wasn't there.

[coachmann]

Dam fine modelling there Jinty. Even if  it didn't actually work the 'catch' looks the part.

 

As an aside, when something leaves the rails the dust cloud and vehicles looking as if they are running on cobbles is quite unnerving. Paradoxically two major derailments I attended but did not witness actually leaving the track caused me to have a recurring nightmare for a while. I think this was because both happened in stations (Llandudno Junction and Dinting) and I dreamed wagons were derailing and speeding down the platform towards me. Typical of dreams, I awoke just as they were about to mow me down. 

 

Regarding Western Region hydraulics, I have a colour album you can have if it is of interest.

[Jintyman]

No.  If the derailment is on point timbers or timber sleepers the worst you usually get is some scoring  - years ago I was visiting a normally switched-out signalbox  and it had a slotted joint catch point just in advance and something caught my eye near it - I went over to have a look and found clear derailment marks of a fairly heavy wagon that had obviously dropped back through the catch and had then simply rerailed itself as the train started away, i.e. it had rolled off and was pulled back on.

 

I attended a derailment at Llandarcy (late 1973) where a loaded 45 ton tank car had run away and gone through the trap - the worst damage was some scored sleepers and it didn't even cut the track circuit interrupter (which was simply a cable).  Alas the shunter who was assisting didn't listen to my instructions and once we'd moved it by lengthening the coupling with a fishplate he didn't scotch the wagon before the coupling slackened and the fishplate fell out and it ran away for a second time - duly derailing about 2 inches from where it had landed the first time; just a few more wheel marks on the sleepers and nothing broken.

 

Overall timber sleepers in reasonable condition and preferably with something like ash, dirt or stone dust instead of ballast are fairly good at stopping a simple wagon breakaway with minimal damage to vehicle and infrastructure.  Run an engine through, especially 100 tons of 6 wheel bogied diesel, and you'll probably get a few broken chairs and some more heavy scoring on the sleepers but not much worse if you're lucky and it was a slow speed move that stopped quickly.  Put down steel plate and that would be the end of it when a wheel lands on it and it won't have any braking effect at all.  And not that you need worry about it but a derailment on concrete sleepers will simply smash them

 

If there's a chance of a faster runaway - especially a catch point on a very steep gradient close to a station or pointwork or a trap where a train might approach under power, then a form of sand drag might be used but I've seen one that was totally ineffective when several hundred tons of coal train and loco just sailed through it as if it wasn't there.

 

Thanks again Mike, I only asked for obvious reasons, as I wondered if the infrastructure would be damaged, and if any methods were used to protect it. Thank you for the most comprehensive answer.

 

 

 

 

Dam fine modelling there Jinty. Even if  it didn't actually work the 'catch' looks the part.

 

As an aside, when something leaves the rails the dust cloud and vehicles looking as if they are running on cobbles is quite unnerving. Paradoxically two major derailments I attended but did not witness actually leaving the track caused me to have a recurring nightmare for a while. I think this was because both happened in stations (Llandudno Junction and Dinting) and I dreamed wagons were derailing and speeding down the platform towards me. Typical of dreams, I awoke just as they were about to mow me down. 

 

Regarding Western Region hydraulics, I have a colour album you can have if it is of interest.

 

Thanks Coachman,

 

Yes I'd certainly be interested in the Hydraulics album, thank you. 

I can imagine the sounds and vibrations of a derailment to any nearby onlookers would be terrifying. 

 

Jinty

[Jintyman]

Well home from work,

So here's an overview of the crossover and the siding turnout which had its check rails finished off last night during a bout of insomnia!!!!

 

 

 

And the other thing I got up to at 'Stupid O'Clock' was starting these..................

 

 

 

And after cleaning the etches up after being quite tarnished a reasonably quick fold up resulted in these ready for the soldering iron.

 

 

Any ideas ppl????

I've got one set of Peartree Engineering 3'7" wheels and what looks like Roxey wheels for the other pair of bogies. Unfortunately two of the wheels are out of true because of the rubber bushes after re-assembly from blackening. The bushes have deformed, maybe from the blackening chemical, I'm not sure, so I think I'll opt for another set of the Peartree wheels and store these away for a 6-wheeler I'm hoping to get.

 

I'm awaiting a visitor bearing gifts, so I'll get the soldering iron warmed up and at least get two bogies up on their wheels.

 

Jinty