Rods_of_Revolution

It's looking good Rob, I'm glad to see you've got RSJs/lintels in there, simple engineering yet many people forget them!

I'm sure copper clad would work for the points and I'm sure a strip of copper clad can be worked to look a little more prototypical for the tiebars.

Cheers,

Jack

Bricks didn't come on pallets even up to the 1970's. They arrived loose stacked on a lorry and they were unloaded by hand; one guy on the lorry throwing to one on the ground stacking, usually two at a time when you got the knack.

 

Common bricks were usually tipped from the lorry, facings as above.

I was assuming that as the military were moving bricks on pallets during the Second World War the idea would have caught on in civilian construction projects shortly after, as one would assume after the war there would be many many pallets knocking around and lots of construction projects to rebuild Europe.

Certainly during the 1950s in the U.S., pallets were very common; there was the famous case of a bloke in Los Angles building a tower out of 2000 of them between 1951 and 1953! Perhaps pallets didn't take off as quickly in Britain, unfortunately I wasn't alive back then to know!

Cheers,

Jack

The foundation would be concrete much as today, the walls may or may not be cavity walls, so you can choose which you want to model. Scaffolding would be similar to how it is today, though there probably wouldn't be any if you're only modeling the foundations and a few courses of bricks. I think the bricks would arrive on pallets, being removed from the pallet by the labor as required, as to what type of pallet, it would be an earlier pallet design of some sort.

Regards,

Jack
 

Now you have the arches and the start of the woodwork for the upper level in place, I've got a much better grasp of what you're doing; it looks great!

Cheers,

Jack

 If  I stand stock over the turnout to the right which routes to off scene top right, run round and then push the rake in to the head shunt I can add several more wagons to the rake. I think thats an exceptable amount of stock, what do others think? Would such a run round and then push in to head shunt seem silly or is there any basis for it in reality?

 

I've begun looking in to drys and which one to use as a prototype, I do like the older styles such as Iain Robinson's, Wheal Elizabeth and Trerices, probably becuase they're smaller and fit that small style layout.

 

I wouldn't be inclined to force extra wagons into rakes, just run them at the length which fits nicely. There are plenty of examples of short trains, Carbis Wharf was served with a single Clay Tiger or sheeted PGA, Drinnick Mill was served with a single Polybulk and single slurry tanks were often found in a short Speedlink rakes with a couple vans or clay hoppers. Especially in the Speedlink era short trains were common and could contain an interesting mix of wagons. If you have a public loading wharf you could include other traffic such as Seaweed in HEAs.

If you like older smaller clay dries then look to Stoker's thread, he's produced some nice drawings that would make an excellent basis to scratch build a small dries or bag store: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64222-china-clay-building-scale-drawings/

You could also mix new and old, there were many traditional clay dries which were adapted, extended or supplimented with newer buildings.

Cheers,

Jack

Out of curiosity when was bagged clay first collected in closed wagons?

 

Thanks for reading

Dave

Probably since railways first started moving china clay, but certainly from the early 1900s onwards.

Cheers,

Jack

I'd have to say I'd agree with your club member as it's the conclusion I came to before I started building Longcarse West and if I can do P4 anyone can. However, it's your train set and not mine so I'll happily sit back and enjoy reading how you get on with the build.

 

Cheers

 

David

 

P.S. 100 items of stock isn't all that much and you don't have to convert it all at once.

Of course, converting to P4 would mean that the stock couldn't be run on other OO layouts, such as Pallet Lane!

Regards,

Jack

thats a bit of a problem for some drivers at the moment, class 70s dont have a hot plate/cooker!!

I'd have thought that would be the single most important criterion when designing a locomotive! That said, it would seem that the Class 70s have a tendency to act like a giant hot plate, perhaps negating the need for smaller ones in the cabs!

Regards,

Jack

Obviously thoroughly testing the 70s, including the hotplate with a few cups of PG Tips!

It was a nice day out, apart from the freezing wind! Your photos have come out nicely! I still haven't processed my shots!

Cheers,

Jack

I have just had an issue that I cannot find noted elsewhere.

I have produced a file to test my recently purchased machine cutting out strapping for wagons.

 

I have produced a DXF file in autocad as I normally would for my laser, but when I open it in the Silhouette software the file is not to scale and as far as i can work out it may be treating a unit as imperial not metric.

 

Any Suggestions?

 

I should say that I have also tried saving the file from Corel with the same effect.

 

Regards

Andy

You can try changing the units in the Silhouette software. Go File>Preferences...>Measurements Tab and then change the units, I think the default is Inches.

Cheers,

Jack

Yes they will get weathered as some point, first job is to finalise the track plan and start laying some track!

 

I was going to use concrete sleepered track for the T1 track, but would they use concrete sleepered points, or would that only be on a fast route which this wouldn't be?

They would almost certainly use wooden sleepered points. The reason is that points vary so much in their geometery, so it's easier to build them bespoke for each location by cutting down timbers, you can't cut down concrete sleepers.

Hi Jack, the numbering is the same as Austrian, in 1903 the line was extended to Waidhofen, begining of the line shuld be Kostelec u Jihlavy, in which case 2 would be besides station building, 3 on the other side.

Description of the photograph I have quoted has confused me, it actually states "na druhe stanicni koleji" which I would translate as second station track.

I ve also read that on lower importance branchlines only main track was numbered 1.

I didn't realise it extended through, that makes sense then. Thanks!

Cheers,

Jack

 Nádraží v Dačicích roku 1975. Na první staniční koleji stojí M 131.1 - „Hurvínek“

       s přípojným vozem Balm, na druhé staniční koleji se připravuje k posunu 556.0.

 

"Station in Dacice. M131 "Hurvinek" stands at first station track with a Balm car, on second a 556.0 is getting ready to shunt (the loco is hiden behind a box car on right)"

Therefore, the photographer stood with his back to the main station.

 

Looking it up now

Can't "Druhe" also mean "other" rather than second?  Let me know if you find out for sure, I've always assumed it's the same as Austria.

Are you going to weather some of those locos Squeaky? Roco have done a great job with the models!

Cheers,

Jack

I've made a couple of alterations and I think I've numbered the tracks as in Marian's post. Although Jack suggests that the track closest to the station is T2 and the lower track is T3

 

I think Marian's post would be correct if the station was a German station, the Austrians number the tracks the other way around and the Czech system was once part of the Austro-Hungarian system and so I believe the numbering would be the same, though I could be wrong.

My understanding is thus: If you're travelling away from a main station, Vienna for example, then as you approach the next station, the main running track is Track 1, the track to your right is Track 2 and the track to your left is Track 3. So if you approach a station which has a single loop on your left, that station would only have a Track 1 and a Track 3, no Track 2!

The track numbers are not the same as the platfom numbers, which are normally numbered in the conventional way.

Cheers,

Jack

John Vaughan mentions an 03 being used on the St Blazey to Wenford in the interim between the Panniers and the 08s (An Illustrated History of West Country Clay Trains, Edition 2).

These are the dates I have written down, hopefully someone can confirm?

D2127

24/08/1964 arrived St Blazey
14/05/1967 Reallocated to Laira

D2129
07/10/1961 Arrived St Blazey
11/04/1965 Reallocated to Landore

D2183
21/04/1962 Arrived St Blazey
19/05/1962 Reallocated to Laira
08/11/1964 Reallocated to St Blazey
14/05/1967 Reallocated to Taunton

Cheers,

Jack

I found a list I made of the 03s that were at one point or another allocated to St Blazey, it may be incomplete though:

D2127

D2129

D2183

Cheers,

Jack

Class 03s were definitely used in Cornwall, there were several that were allocated to St Blazey over the years. At least one was also used on the Wenford Bridge route before it was replaced by 08s, as unsurprisingly it lacked the grunt to tackle those workings!

Cheers,

Jack

That triggers the question: as NR isn't responsible for (breaches of) the dykes, why should NR foot the bill, and by extension all railway users & UK taxpayers?

The seawall as far as I'm aware is the responsibilty of NR. It was built by the South Devon Railway, which became part of the GWR, then part of BR, then Railtrack and now I assume NR.

Cheers,

Jack

Watch out for one thing. The line nearest the station building is not usually for use by passenger trains, just freight.

 

Edit to add: I know that I bore for Britain about this aspect of layout design but....... do look at angling the track so that it is not parallel to the baseboard edge. Looks much better and, in this case, will even allow you to lengthen the loops a bit.

Agreed!

The nearest track is known in German speaking parts as the "ladegleis", or in English "loading track". The middle track would be Track 1, the track nearest the station would be Track 2 and the road the shed siding leaves would be Track 3. Track 2, the Ladegleis will have a weighbridge on it, it's normally a little building next to the tracks with a short section of track on a large steel plate. Basically the wagons would be propelled into the siding being weighed as required. In your era it may be out of use, or still in use, either way it will probably still exist because Continentals are less inclined to demolish infrastructure that may be needed again, unlike Britain!

Keeping tracks away from being parallel looks to my eyes like an arbitrary slice of reality, it feels in a way a little more natural and even makes the track seem to flow more fluidically. You also get the bonus of extra length!

Cheers,

Jack

The track plan is typical of many stations built during the Austro-Hungarian Empire, it's a very functional track layout and provided the tracks are the correct relative length (as yours are) you can't really go wrong with it!

I look forward to seeing it progress! Don't forget to put wasp-stripes around the base of the lights, put black and white edging on the platforms and make sure there's more grass than ballast around the track!

Cheers,

Jack

The lights look quite effective, I looked at the picture before reading the text and I'd see you'd added lights, though I didn't realise they were are as simple to make as they were!

Cheers,

Jack

Yes rich, it suddenly dawned on me that I needn't have mirrored the design so I went back and reproduced it with them all the one hand, and other than it being a bit of a task to get them off an overly sticky cutting mat all was ok.

 

Jason the DXF file was created on a program called EMS , a free piece of software that while limited in some respects is very easy to use, has some good features whilst not having shown up any limitations to what I need.

 

iron bridge part b.DXF

 

Oh, just tried to upload the studio file also, it  says I'm not allowed to ???

 

I am not sure if the problem is software or hardware generated,  when I redid the file to 'all one hand' everything cut fine, straight lines, no excess rad's in the corners. It's all a bit odd really.

Anyway bridge building continues.

 

Kevan

For what it's worth I opened that file in AutoCAD and it looks completely fine. There are no hidden lines or anything and the bars are all a consistant .42mm thick.

What I think may of happened is that the cutting mat shifted for some reason. The cutter is "dumb" so if, for whatever reason, the cutting mat got stuck or slipped .2mm during the cut then the machine would just carry on regardless. It looks to me like it shifted .2mm either towards or away from the machine.

Cheers,

Jack

costly yes, disruptive yes, dangerous cant see why. steel grid on the track, maybe even just between the rails. safe to walk on and people wouldnt see the water.

 

track5.jpg

 

refinement of the idea for added strength, its basically a bridge over a storm drain.

I realise its not going to be done, but I think Brunel would have liked it

 

fff (1).JPG

The refined idea it not much better than the existing set up because you're relying on the seawall to support the track, so when the wall fails the track bed collapses with it! With your original design the issue you that you run into is that when the wall fails it can collapse back into the plies supporting the track slab potentially damaging them, backfilling around the piles supporting the track slab prevents that.

Regards,

Jack

Good afternoon,

 

So after some careful thinking I have put together a short list of loco's 

03,14,22,25,25,33,37,42,42,52.

 

could you tell me if that sounds any good and would you add or remove any loco

 

Thanks Tom.

If you're running in the hydraulic period I'd probably leave out the Class 37, they were not common until the 1980s when they replaced the class 25s. I'd also remove the Class 14, as I'm not sure they ever worked in Cornwall, though I'm happy to be proven wrong! I'd use a Class 08 in exchange for the Class 14. As has been said above 33s were a rarity in Cornwall and I don't think they would have been seen at all in the hydraulic era. Class 03s worked at St Blazey as well as around Plymouth, so they are fine. as are the 08s, 22s, 25s, Hymeks(rarer), 42s, 43s, Peaks and 52s.

Cheers,

Jack

The software that comes with the silhouette cutters is a vector drawing package for arts and crafts, it's not really intended for model engineering. If you want a decent CAD package that costs nothing, is professional standard and exports straight to .dxf, then try DraftSight: http://www.3ds.com/products-services/draftsight/overview/

Using engineering software for engineering applications avoids the issues outlined above!

Cheers,

Jack

The trackwork flows nicely! I look forward to updates!

Cheers,

Jack