Guest jim s-w Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Hi Dave Bit late to this one but can I ask why the front of the layout is straight when the prototype is curved. Introducing a curve to the layout will break the curve - straight bit - curve (ie trainset) look. HTH Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted December 23, 2010 Author Share Posted December 23, 2010 Hi Jim, Thanks for the comment - you're absolutely right, it did look 'trainset' and I've tweaked it such that it matches the prototype more now. The curve is concave, so it make sense to keep the straight front to the layout to make it easier for me to build. I've attached the latest XTrkCAD file below, much more happy with it, see what you think:: Filton AW v7.5.xtc The scenic part of the layout isn't too critical at this stage, as there are only a pair of points and I'm planning to use flexi-track so I can make final tweaks freehand later on. Brilliant work on P4NS by the way, that layout is magnificent! I've made some progress today, and have found a way of printing on to A0 - bascially, I've broken the layout into the 10 boards and then set the room size to 1100mm by 800mm then exported to Bitmap. From here, I've dragged the image into PowerPoint, set the size to 1100mm by 800mm, then printed on the plotter. Not too laborious, but the plotter is a bit slow (and now it's failed, which is a nuisance as it'll be January before I can make any progress with it). Anyway, here's one of the sheets: Just need to get the materials now - I'm planning on using 6mm MDF - as it's easy to work and very flat - I'm going to brace the boards and paint them anyway. What do other people generally use? Also, I've done a few sums on the length of the fiddleyards and reckon the 'South Wales' fiddleyard will only take a 6 coach HST set, which is a bit of a shame, but I'm prepared to live with it. There must have been a 6 coach HST that ran once in FGW colours? Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete McCrea Posted December 28, 2010 Share Posted December 28, 2010 Back in 2002-2003 I was working on a placement year at Jarvis Rail based out of Collett House in Temple Meads. One of the projects I worked on was the remodelling of FAW at the initial stages. I'm away at the moment, but when I get home I'll try and dig out my old day book from the period and see what's in there relating to FAW. I might even have some old site visit images somewhere, though I guess these will be of less use due to the fact that was he old plan... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 Made some progress today - after some great discussion on the baseboard construction (see here: http://www.rmweb.co....ds/page__st__25), I'm going to have a go at making the baseboards out of ply-framed ply. Using XTRkCAD I've arranged all the ply parts in such a way that it'll be possible to CNC machine them out of a sheet. I've sent this file off to a wood working firm for a quote, so hopefully I'll get some boards soon! Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 I picked up a sheet of extruded foam today at B+Q as a quick test to see if it is suitable for using as a baseboard before I start cutting wood and making the framing. My initial impressions of the stuff are good, it's very light and tougher than I thought it would be. The trouble is that my track plan is bigger than a sheet is, so I'll need to join the foam. Has anyone ever managed to join this stuff, and if so, what's the best stuff to use? Thanks, Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomascpre Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Using XTRkCAD I've arranged all the ply parts in such a way that it'll be possible to CNC machine them out of a sheet. I've sent this file off to a wood working firm for a quote, so hopefully I'll get some boards soon! Dave There is a whole article in HMRS Jornal just out on CNC and nowhere does the author explain what the initials stand for! What is it please Dave? Regards Howard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 CNC = Computer Numerically Controlled. Basically it's a milling machine or a lathe (or a router even) where movement is controlled by computer. In short, you can do the design on computer, then get the CNC machine to do the drilling / milling / cutting. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share Posted January 15, 2011 After a quick experiement last night, it turns out that good old wood PVA is the stuff to glue extruded polystyrene together! I let it go off last night and cut my baseboard shape out with a coping saw. It's quite hard to get a clean cut with a coping saw (or a knife), so next time I'll cut it over-size and sand it down. Using a coarse sandpaper gives a very clean and smooth edge - this foam is amazing stuff to work with! I've rolled a Mk3 on a length of loose track and am impressed with how quiet it is, none of that 'drum' effect that you get with plywood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 21, 2011 Author Share Posted January 21, 2011 I finally managed to get all my A0 printouts completed and spent all afternoon cutting them out. The individual boards are of a manageable size which I'm pleased about - but the layout will be fairly large when it's all arranged (too big for my sitting room). Hopefully the severity of the curves at both ends won't detract too much when it's all ballasted etc (hopefully!!). Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 11, 2012 Author Share Posted January 11, 2012 It's been about a year since my last update and all that’s happened is that things have gone backwards. Having had an extension built has meant that I had to scrap the work I’d done on my layout. However, the extension does give me plenty more room in the garage and has made it a much more pleasant place to work. The time away from the layout has also given me plenty of time to formulate an evolved plan. The basics are that the layout will be mounted on a stressed, 3150mm long, ‘sub-frame’ with the scenic and running boards sitting on that. This gives the benefit that I can work on smaller boards elsewhere in the house to allow the more fiddly work (wiring, track, etc.) to be completed without the temptation to run trains. Additionally, and should the desire present itself, I can build different boards to change the layout whilst keeping the storage yards. The ends of the layout will be hinged, for access and to protect the layout from dust etc. The whole layout will be stored in the ceiling of the loft, so light weight is going to be key. I’m still deciding whether it’s best to use insulation foam or traditional plywood as a base for the scenic boards. Whilst on the face of it, the foam boards seem the obvious choice, I’m not sure how the wiring will work or how I’ll satisfactorily align and bolt together all the boards so I’m now leaning back to ply. I plan to mount all the control electronics (DCC command station, Block occupancy detectors, etc.) on a single board under the storage yard and run harnesses from each scenic board to it. This way, each board can be tested and checked independently, something that my previous attempts haven’t allowed. Point decoders and motors will be distributed locally and I plan to use the Singlet / Quad servo units from Tam Valley Depot. As I work near Filton Abbeywood station it’s been interesting to visit to take in some of the detail. Given that I read somewhere that FAW had been voted as one of, if not the, bleakest station in the South West, there are a surprising number of ‘model-able’ features, the complex footbridge, various shelters, signals, platforms, nasty little ticket kiosk and the massive bright red buffers being the most obvious. The fauna around the station is basic, so this should be not too difficult to replicate. Also, the towering MoD headquarters in the background lends itself to being a photographic backscene. As mentioned in my previous posts, I plan to run the layout as it exists in real life, although not strictly prototypically. The storage sidings are sized to take a 7-carriage rake HST (hopefully an 8 will fit) and a 10 wagon coal train as these, as well as the Voyager / class 143 / 150 / 158 services, heavy steel and oil freight make up the staple diet of traffic. The problem with running it like this is that the HSTs run to South Wales on the single line (no problem), but on returning from South Wales cross the up-line to Bristol Parkway and end up on the innermost road on my layout, from where it needs to cross two lines to get back to its long storage yard, hence the rather messy points arrangement (see right of track plan). If anyone has any suggestions on how to remedy or improve this or has any other comments, then I’d appreciate them. The track plan is here: Filton Abbeywood v56 (tight).xtc Having spent some time thinking about the track plan, I decided it might be an idea to establish how the platforms may look. The platforms at FAW are, I estimate, 110m in length, which equates to about 1.6m in OO scale world. Having spent ages trying to scale this, I decided that It would be better to just overlay the aerial photo to see how close I’d got it. As it turns out, it’s not far off, but the prototypical tracks are much more curved than I’d thought, although this won’t take much tweaking to correct on XTrkCAD. The waste ground near the points I’ll have to freelance a bit – on the prototype, this area is HUGE (bigger than the entire layout) and given that all there is an expanse of featureless ballast, a couple of extra long points and those buffers, not exactly lighting my modelling fire. To me though, it all feels achievable. Just need to get cracking designing the subframe now. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Your fiddle yard follows the traditional layout of several loops for each running line. I think you'd be better off combining the two Up lines on the curve at the right hand end (just as they do "off-scene" in reality) and bringing the two Cardiff lines back into the Up line at the left hand end, perhaps with a couple of sidings in the top left hand corner to bounce back Cardiff DMUs. This would leave only two tracks entering/leaving the storage loops at each end. I think you should rearrange these with some storage loops on the outside for uni-directional trains, and more loops in the middle with access to/from both tracks at each end. HSTs and DMUs would live in the middle loops so they could run in either direction on the correct line and also to/from the Cardiff lines at the left, and the loops for DMUs could be quite short. An HST going towards Cardiff would only have to cross over one track (at the left hand end of the layout) to return to storage in a middle loop. Freights from Cardiff/Avonmouth towards Bristol might also be stored in one of the middle loops, as a way of getting back from the inside track on the right of the layout to the outside track on the left. Hope this makes sense! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 Hi Edwin, Thanks for you comments. I've tried to incorporate your suggestions but keep coming up against the same problems. The length of an HST is about 3000mm, so with a bit of stopping room this means that I need about 3300mm which can't be accommodated in the middle fiddle yard lanes. As the ends will be hinged, I don't want to have points across the fold line and to keep the curve radii sensible and the width of the layout as slim as possible to fit in the garage with space to move around it, it's proving quite hard to get more points in. I like the idea of having sidings for DMUs, I'll try and incorporate a couple of those. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted September 16, 2012 Author Share Posted September 16, 2012 After a hectic summer and with the nights drawing in, I'd thought I'd post what I've been up to and what I'm thinking about the layout. As I'd like to run long trains, I'd decided that I'm going to build a motorised traverser for the layout (see my other thread: http://www.rmweb.co....er/page__st__25). This reduces the number of points that I require, which I've found to be the enemy of smooth running when close together. I've redesigned the layout on XTrkCAD to look like this: Filton AW v70.xtc The 'orphaned' tracks are to represent the extent of the traverser motion. This gives 'scenic' area of approx 3000mm x (up to) 1200mm with an overall layout size of 4200mm x 1700mm, which is pretty much the maximum I can get in my garage! The minimum radius is 520mm, which hopefully my fairly recent stock can handle. I'm undecided whether to make both ends of the layout in the non-scenic are symmetrical with 4 roads, in case I want to use the scenic baseboard for another project. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Heh, I work not to far from FAW at the moment (behind the offices in the first pic - surprised you can't see the roof of our offices to the right tbh, but there you go...) so I'll be following this with interest given that I know the location well, am interested in modern image and I'm keeping an eye on your traverser... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Hello all, I've spent a few weeks trying to optimise my layout plan so that I can draw up the plans for the support frame. As the layout will be to one side of the garage, I'm limited to 1750mm from the front to the back of the traverser. This necessitates some tightish turns on the inner curves, about 500mm which is tighter than I'd like. As it will be in the off-scene area I'm not concerned about the appearance but as I'd like to run close-coupling am worried that my stock will make it round. I plan to retro-fit Keen couplings to my Mk3s but wonder if any body had any suggestions as to what is the realistic minimum? Also, to get it to look right, I'd like to run the tracks at a prototypical distance apart and am pondering as to what is the closest distance apart that I can run 570mm radii curves at? 50mm would be my guess, does anyone have practical experience? Also, I've moved it round so that the curve runs opposite to what it does on the prototype. This gives more space at the front and I can live with that. Thoughts and advice appreciated.... Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
class"66" Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Very nice plans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share Posted January 20, 2013 I've been worked for a few weeks (months) on my automated traverser (see here if interested: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/49884-automated-motorised-traverser/page-3?) but I reckon I've cracked that bit now so my attention has turned to designing and building the frame work / layout itself. I've tweaked my track plan to minimise the gradients to the fiddleyard, so decided to print out the platform section of the scenic part on paper to see what it looks like and get a sense of scale. As the look of Filton is all about the platforms and the complex footbridge, I decided to add these to the plan as well as close to scale as looked right on the screen. The plan: When printed out and stuck together, I found some old code 100 track and laid it down. What really amazed me is the size / length of the platforms. I was worried that a 3 carriage DMU might be a bit big, but even at 10% under length, they look huge! This exercise was well worth doing, I can mock up the footbridge as well as check dimensions. I've moved the lines closer together by 5mm each to give a track pitch of 50mm - much more prototypical! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted February 12, 2013 Author Share Posted February 12, 2013 Was having a look at stock to run on my layout at lunchtime - the Class 170 in CrossCountry colours is tempting as I like the model and the livery, but I'm not sure that one has ever run through Filton because of problems at (i.e. the unit being restricted / banned from) at Bristol Temple Meads. Has anyone ever seen a Turbostar / 170 operating from FAW? Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I was worried that a 3 carriage DMU might be a bit big, but even at 10% under length, they look huge! For what it's worth, the Filton platforms will fit a 3-car 158 + 2-car 150 with a few feet to spare, but a 5 car 158 is too long, just. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stadman Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Was having a look at stock to run on my layout at lunchtime - the Class 170 in CrossCountry colours is tempting as I like the model and the livery, but I'm not sure that one has ever run through Filton because of problems at (i.e. the unit being restricted / banned from) at Bristol Temple Meads. Has anyone ever seen a Turbostar / 170 operating from FAW? Dave Haven't seen one but no reason why they couldn't. (Diversionary) Cross Country has 4/5 car stop markers on the platforms Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Robert Shrives Posted February 12, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2013 Hi Guys, XC 170 not cleared , ok to run Newport - Pillning - BPW- Yate I did this a few weeks ago when NR had a tree on the loose near Gloucester.. Currently no plans to get clearance due to complications of having to clear Bristol TM. A cost that XC does not need to spend. Great Layout idea and look forward to watching progress - Iguess a major expense will be adding all the hideous graffitti that the Bristol area "persons" - add your own word here, have plastered over every inch of railway property! Robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted February 12, 2013 Author Share Posted February 12, 2013 Hi Robert, What is meant by 'not cleared'? It looks like the XC170s get tantalisingly close to FAW, but miss it by a whisker! Yes - you are quite right about the local graffitti, although when I've visited the station I've not noticed it being too bad. Maybe I need to visit again! Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stadman Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Robert, Would a 170 be able to get to FAW and reverse? Not actually going to BTM (I could of course actually check this on the appropriate table, but seems like you may already know) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deev Posted February 17, 2013 Author Share Posted February 17, 2013 Maybe an XC170 has run through FAW en route from Cardiff to Barton Hill depot for refuelling / servicing? Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattWallace Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Hi Dave, Any news on this layout? Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.