92220

Thanks so much Jamie; that could be the solution. I will let you know! But I’m enjoying finishing 46251 first. Iain

Waiting for a C&L delivery so that I can continue with constructing the mainlines on the layout, so with a couple of hours free today I had another look at the DJH Fairburn 4mt tank I had started a couple of months ago. To be honest, this has been a somewhat frustrating kit. Now some of that frustration may be best attributed to my incompetence or at least lack of experience. But it has mirrored the 2nd DJH Black 5 that I built. Quite a lot of it didn’t fit all that well, and some parts were either missing, or bore no relation to drawings, photos or instructions. The trailing bogie casting was only half formed but I can replace that with a Comet one. I tried to build the loco with a set of Gibson drivers but I could not, for the life of me, get them set up properly. So I reluctantly binned that idea and used the supplied Romfords. But eventually, having battled with it to this stage, I am certainly in need of a bit of advice how to attach the cab roof sensibly. It is touch and go whether the roof is exactly the right dimensions anyway, and I may to make some adjustments or scratchbuild a replacement. But either way, I have read plenty about tank engine roofs being built to be detachable, or perhaps being glued on after painting. I can’t see this one being glued effectively as there is no lip or overhang on any edge when offered up (hence maybe the roof is too small?). I have read about clips and pieces of angle to enable the roof to be slid in or otherwise retained. Can anyone offer me any guidance here? thanks in advance. So, to ease the frustration I decided to build another Coronation. I’m starting to lean towards Comet mechs under rtr bodies for the majority of my locos. I can modify and detail the rtr body reasonably in most cases, and the quality of the underlying detailing, painting and lining is generally going to be better than I can manage. This one, however, will be a slight departure in that I will use a Hornby chassis. It was originally under 46248 but in adding lead to the body and the chassis they became incompatible. Yes, I know. But it did force me to go the Comet route and I haven’t looked back. I picked up a 46251 cheaply on eBay a few years ago, sold the chassis and so have the body and tender for about £23. The plan is: Full Comet additions to the loco - deflectors, rear frame extensions, bogie, trailing truck, cab floor, fall plate and doors, inside cylinder cover, sandboxes, smokebox door dart, plus new handrails and pillars. Etched plates from 247. The tender will have the side sheets thinned, the awful ledge removed, and a decent loco-tender (TW) coupling. The next one, for the green lovers, will be 46239 on Comet frames. Iain

Great stuff Graham! I have so much that ought to have a run round your chapel.... Best wishes, Iain

Good morning Tony, I hope that you and Mo are well. My experience of recent sheets of HMRS Pressfix no. 14 mirrors yours and that of others, I’m afraid. I am not quite so adept at applying (very high quality) waterslide lining in acceptably straight lines on brass carriages, but will have to practise more. On another note, I thought you and other contributors might be interested in these two poor quality photos of my progress on Camden Shed. Buildings and train are just placed to give a sense of the scene. Both the Primrose Hill station building and Camden Goods shed will be extended for the new layout since I have more space. The goods yard will provide either a semi-working or static backdrop to the loco shed and mainlines. Hoping to complete the mainline circuit in the next couple of weeks or so. Storage yard is complete already. I look forward to welcoming you here one day. best wishes, Iain

Jonathan, I have no idea how I can have been so negligent as to miss this! Duly followed and I will catch up in due course. best wishes, Iain

Thanks Mark, much appreciated. I thought of something broadly similar but not as neat, and then gave up the idea of a template. The slight issue with it is that the gentle curve isn’t constant, as I found when trying to fit the templot plan to the OS map. So.....it is slightly hard to explain this really clearly in words, but here goes..... What I have done is to mark the board through the templot plan at roughly 4-6” intervals for the trackbed edges and the 8 railheads (it was clearly pointless doing the rails except at each end of a foam-length section, as I realised after one round of this) Then cut a section of foam using the templot plan for the trackbed. Glue this down Align the section of templot plan at both ends, and fix it temporarily with tape. Then mark the rails at the same intervals as before, creating a dashed line for each. I’m not sure whether this is visible on the photo but it’s clear enough in person. Graham’s method is good too. Neat and mathematical too, as I recall. Versines? Again, the issue here is the track spacing. Nominally I have up fast - 10 foot - up slow - 6 foot - down slow - 10 foot - down fast. You would think. But the 10 foots widen approaching the dive under, and narrow at the south end a little. This is off the OS map. I have considered redoing the south end of the mainlines as a more regular 10’-6’-10’ spacing throughout, even though it is not what my information tells me, just because it will look better. So anyway, I felt I needed to mark all 4 lines individually. This part, the north half, is easy. We will see when I start on the long crossovers how this all lines up at the south end. Iain

Thanks Graham, yes, it is really good to get a sense of how it might look as it progresses. Starting to lay the trackbed with the Hobby Holidays foam that Norman Solomon used on Little Bytham. I may not have his skill but I can certainly steal some of his methods. I’ve carefully aligned these pieces to transition from the cork to the foam. Slightly unsure still about ballasting with thick sleepered track. My previous method, stolen from Captain Kernow and Gordon S, worked well, but I fear it won’t be as good with the thicker stuff. However, I don’t have much choice if I am to be able to use even some of the British Finetrax point kits, not to mention the 20m of mainline chaired track I have ordered from C&L. I always said that I wanted to lay, test, wire, test, paint, test, ballast, test, weather, test, on the mainlines especially. Last time, I tried to paint, wire, lay, and ballast all in one go as Mr. Solomon does. That’s all very well if you can guarantee that what you have built is perfect. Which I can’t and couldn’t. All we need now is to connect mine to yours, as it were. I have 0.001% and you have about 30%, of the total track mileage on the LMR. Almost a year since you were here and you well and truly kicked me off in the right direction. Thank you! best wishes, Iain

Hi Pete, Well, yes that’s true I know, but (a) I will just do it bit by bit as it was always going to be a long term project. (b) I hope for a bit of assistance (paid) for the two most complex formations, and (c) Wayne’s new British Finetrax OO-SF point kits will shorten the build time a lot. Assuming they can be available soon enough. Planning to get the mainlines laid and fully functioning before starting on the yard. There is quite a lot of plain track too! Iain

Morning all, Gate fully built and functional. I do think I will prefer the brass rod and tube locating pins to transfer power and ensure perfect fine alignment at the southern (diagonal cut) end. If anyone has advice where to get these, I’d be grateful. If I just went with my own ideas, I would buy some 2mm rod and 2 mm ID tube and make them from scratch. Started to lay the Hobby Holidays closed cell foam for the mainlines. I thought it would be worth getting a sense of the overall scene so here are a couple of snaps. Ignore what 46248 is (not) pulling. It’s a random collection of stock. Iain

Hi Wayne, I am very excited to see what you are doing here - somewhat selfishly too, especially coming as I start the next phase of Camden Shed mk2. The quality of these look excellent and I will be keen to order a load when you are ready. thank you, and best wishes. Iain

Thank you, Martin. That makes sense. From what I can see, these new kits have square-on timbering so would be ideal for my mainlines? In the yard, most of the timbering will be almost hidden under ash ballast and debris anyway. But I can build a few and use a few kits there. How fast will Wayne be producing the longer versions - C10 etc? Iain

Thanks Graham and Martin. Yes the mainlines were definitely still bullhead into the early 60’s. I am definitely leaning towards the British Finescale pointwork for the running lines and the shed area, because it will be only slightly more expensive, a hell of a lot faster, and less likely not to work well than if I handbuilt it. The only complex pieces are the scissors crossover off the down fast to the shed, and the characteristic fully checkrailed 3 turnout 2 crossing formation by the turntable. I think these might not be able to be made effectively from the British Finescale kits, so will need to be handbuilt. I have approached an esteemed modeller on this forum who did agree he’d be happy to do these, although it was 2 years ago when I asked him! The plain track throughout will be proprietary, not handbuilt. I was just wondering which to go with. I am assuming thick sleepered track to match the point kits. Iain

I thought you had used C&L Mark? I was probably mistaken! Iain

I have a question, which may be better asked in a separate topic, but I’ll try here first. Camden Mk1 used C&L thin sleeper plain track on the scenic side. I’m not sure how available that is now. It was a bit flimsy but the ballasting effect was good, I think (tell me if it wasn’t?) I have a few lengths of new track left over but not much. And I do need a fair bit to be honest. But either way, I’d like the smoothest transition from Peco Streamline code 75 off scene to the finescale bullhead on the scenic section. I have used code 100 on the gate section and under the workbench for durability, but transition to code 75 beyond. It seems I have more choices now. I am also intrigued by the new OO-SF pointwork that promises to become available soon, which is thick sleepered and would therefore steer me to thick sleepered plain track. If these kits in different sizes come in at £22.95 each, they can be slightly curved to fit the templot plan, they would cut my build time by about 90% and only increase the cost by a little. So for plain track? C&L thick sleeper? With directional keys for the mainlines and alternate/ random for the yard? And 60’ lengths? Peco bullhead? SMP thin sleeper? Can anyone advise which is closest in railhead height to the Peco code 75? Or is the difference so minimal that my carpentry will add far more errors?!? How well does the thick sleepered stuff ballast? Maybe I should just buy a bit of each and test it out, but the combined expertise on here is usually more helpful than I am. thanks in advance, Iain

Added extra quadrant locks. I aligned the barrel bolts so that opposite ones are at the opposite edges of their tolerances, i.e. when used together they should hold the boards in alignment. I chose to add the extra locks to double the chance of that happening. Any advice welcome. Obviously at the hinge end it works perfectly, but the far end, with diagonal cuts, will be more critical. Apologies for the excessive posting but having a few issues reducing photo size tonight. Iain

From the other side: Track laid loosely to check alignment of copperclad strips

Making the gate section to enable access to the centre of the layout (not to mention the workbenches) was always going to be a crucial step in this build. I didn’t have much choice where the gate section would go, given the shape of the room and the plan. With 4 mainlines on a gentle reverse curve and the two slow/electric lines descending and then re-ascending, it was not a simple job. There will also be some track added added here to connect to the goods yard so it can be more than a scenic backdrop. Well, a little more only - stay tuned. LNER4479 and I decided a gate section would be more effective than a lifting bridge partly due to the roof slope, but anyway, here is the pictorial story to follow on from last week’s progress. Probably in a couple of consecutive posts Cork laid. It looks like a patchwork. Because it is. But it is smooth and flat. Barrel bolts fixed to (try to) ensure alignment. Cuts made and it works! Iain

This end was the complicated bit, where I had to use 9mm ply for intra-board bracing due to the need for curvature. Every joint was drilled, countersunk, glued and screwed.

Well it’s been a fair while. I’ve not been totally lazy: All the scenic side boards are built and ready to go. The section in the foreground includes what will become an opening gate. When I put the hinges on, look heavenwards in hope, and cut it. This was earlier in construction as I was marking out so you can see, I hope, that it’s got potential. Most of the boards are fairly straightforward. 12mm birch ply with a double laminate of 12mm side rails and 12mm cross bracing every 15-24” depending to some extent on what is going above the board. The boards overlap the construction underneath so they are effectively one large piece. I know this will create several problems. But it solves some too. I deliberated long about cutting the plan intricately into sections but to be honest it became so complicated. This is basically a flat earth layout (apart from the start of the slow/DC line dive under) that will never travel anywhere. So making it flat and solid seemed more important than anything. I could add some more photos showing my slightly eccentric, sturdy (though not of Physicsman proportions) methods. If anyone is interested. Not too late to say Happy New Year I hope. Iain

Yes. Iain

I have a new type SFB Jub smokebox, boiler and firebox left over from my 45735 build, Graham. You’re more than welcome to it. Iain

its a fun route Clive: I also did the ultimate version of the Black 5 from a Hornby basis: Details on my thread in my signature if anyone is interested. Iain

I’ve realised that there are few things in life more important than places to take three (or more) Duchesses! Great to see your progress, Graham. Hope to catch up soon. best wishes, Iain

Thank you, Ian. You can see about halfway down this post and the few following it what the old Rebuilt Jubilee was like: I had another look at this one today actually. The body is a lot better with the cab 2mm lower but the smokebox is a bit weedy and the tender is oddly small. I might finish it as Phoenix one day with a welded tender and a full respray. I need to do a bit to the chassis as it has Scot balance weights and sandpipes. Iain