LNER4479

February 2

With so much to do, there's always something different to be done to keep the variety and interest going.

This, for example. A gap that's needed filling for the last six months, this is the continuation of the goods lines from Bog Junc (top left) into Dentonholme yard (bottom right).

A 6' x 2' piece of 9mm recently procured has been suitable marked, cut and just placed in position for now. As you can see, there's two parts to it. I'll come back to that.

Boards removed and structure being installed.

Leg added, boards fixed for keeps and corked.

And now with cork painted. This view taken specifically to show the new boards in relation to the other recent work. In the background is Upperby. The goods lines then follow the recently installed curve top left, through Bog Junc. and towards the camera to link up with the already constructed northern end of Dentonholme Goods Yard.

In some ways, it's a bit of a significant moment or at least a milestone - I now have the complete trackbed for the out and back route of a goods train via the WCML. As well, almost inadvertently (as it wasn't planned), a complete circuit into the bargain.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. There's track needing laying and then getting it all wired up is going to slow me down a little ...

(Part 2 to follow - run out of space to upload any more photos on this post)

January 29

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I suggest that if the points in question are part of the main line they should be motorised. Otherwise, eventually, someone will forget to flick them across.

Everything on the signalbox diagram will be motored and interlocked with signals etc. I was talking about shunting points only, outside the signalled area.

January 28

Another day, another set of points to install ...

Actually, there's 3 evenings' work on show here. Cut (and curve) track to length; paint (spray); mark and cut square holes; install motors / switches; solder on wires (much easier than upside-down soldering).

And now the 'phew' moment. Focus for this work has been the 3-way (tandem) point which appeared recently. The two other leads off the point lead into the goods yard; the Y-point behind is the depot entrance point.

A quick 'push through' with these three coaches gives initial confidence that all should be OK in terms of alignment, following the gentle tweaking.

Beginning to look the part? This shows the sort of double track arrangement beyond the actual junctions. Top right is the depot EXIT point - also the way in / out of the carriage shed - the succession of crossovers heading towards the camera ensure light locos / stock moves gain the correct running line heading for the station.

Not quite 'job done' but all remaining pointwork is of the more straightforward shunting type. Questionable whether any of the closer-to-hand ones even need point motors for a home layout?

January 27

On 26/01/2024 at 10:51, Chamby said:

We should indulgently enjoy our hobby along the way - it is not a job with a deadline to be rushed, it gives much more than instant gratification. The pleasure of building a kit, taking your time to get it right, leaving it for a bit sometimes then coming back when you’ve worked out a problem or are in the right frame of mind again: all this is a part of the relaxed approach that makes the hobby enjoyable.

On 26/01/2024 at 12:49, Methuselah said:

Like many folk, I have a mixture of kit, scratchbuild and RTR locos.

Been reading the recent posts re RTR vs kit / scratchbuild.

I've recently taken on the challenge of completing a scratchbuild that I started some 35 years ago (I'm sure there'll be others who have even longer running projects waiting patiently on their workbench). It'll be my only second ever full scratchbuild.

It's a Fairburn tank.

When I started it, 35 years ago, no such RTR offering was available ...

... but now? I could have - in fact I DO have - the Bachmann offering. So why bother with all this effort, now? I must be totally doolally, within everything else I have to do on my insane layout project ...

Because I like making things, that's why! Right from the word go, I took to 'making things' without any particular encouragement. Lego, Meccano, Airfix kits when I was younger and then later on I found I could solder things. Nobody showed me (can't you tell?), I just had a go and worked out my own way of doing it.

It's why I don't fear for the future of the hobby. There'll always be a sector within the hobby that like making things. In fact, even if folks are using RTR in putting together a layout, so what? - they're still making a layout. There's plenty who find the baseboard / tracklaying / electrics side of layout construction hard-going ... but once they get to the scenic side of things, they come to life and often create amazing effects and scenes. The sort of stuff that I conversely struggle with (particularly the use of paint, colour, tone, light n shade, etc), not part of my skill set at all.

I also don't subscribe to the view that everyone used to make things in the past 'because they had to'. The pages of RM in the 1960s and 70s had plenty of layouts cheerfully using the HD and Triang RTR items of the day. Other locos may have been a bodyline kit mounted on a standard RTR chassis - my Dad had quite a few of those, using the HD R1 0-6-0 chassis. He paid a professional modeller to do the work for him. Ironically, it's only in more recent times that he's 'had a go' himself, gluing together (never soldering!) such a kit and mounting it on a current RTR 'Jinty' chassis. A straw poll of one, I accept, but ... well ... for what it's worth. The hobby's alive n well, so far as I'm concerned.

January 27

Meanwhile, how's 'e getting on with that Fairburn tank? C'mon, admit it - you forgot all about it, didn't you? 🥴

Well, anyway ... frames and driving wheels have been painted and wheels fitted, hopefully for keeps. There was a bit more involved than what might appear here, as there was a tight spot, which I eventually traced to a coupling rod bearing hole not being quite where it should be (despite having used the coupling rods as template for drilling wheel centres, Guy Williams style). Hole gingerly elongated, sliver of brass soldered in and hole re- drilled ... Success! Now perfectly free running. Took a bit of time but worth the effort, methinks?

Whilst I was on the chassis, treated myself to some valve gear work. Some of this uses the MRJ LMS Stainless steel etch.

Duly assembled. Radius rods set in forward gear; I like to see it all moving 🤗

Recent evenings have seen work switch to superstructure. First horror moment was the realisation that I hadn't built in the tapers to the rear bunker sides when I originally put this together, 35 years ago. Decided that I couldn't live with it so I cut down the fold, cleaned up and re-soldered, one side at a time.

That's better. With the mod. done, I can now solder in the missing bunker top pieces, which of course maintain the same taper angle, so it's not all simple 90 degree work.

That's looking better! As of 'knocking off' at 1am this morning(!) Spotted that the inset for the footstep is actually checker plate which I knew I had a little bit of in the scrap box.

Otherwise, the more I work on the loco, the more I realise how relatively 'green' I was all them years ago. It ain't ever going to win any prizes (other than a sympathy vote!) but it'll be good to get it finished at long last 🙂

January 25

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

Possibly a P4 layout called Knutsford. Quite a few years ago there was a plan to have some Gladiator 7mm kits reduced to 4mm scale. It didn't come to anything but a tiny number of test etches for the B7 (and a D9) were produced.

That (the B7 on Knutsford East Junction - one of the original 18.83 challenge layouts) was the work of the late Dick Petter.

The one and only time I visited Roy Jackson at Retford, he showed me his half built B7, cursing at the insanely small size of some of the valve gear components, scaled down from 7mm.

At the risk of blatant advertising (which it's not meant to be in this context), a 4mm etch for the GC self-trimming tender is available through G-Train, being the ultimate fruition of an aborted project to produce one in the Great Central models range. One of the features I believed was distinctive was the shape of the FRONT coal plate top, having a noticeably lower centre section compared to the gentle upwards arch of the standard 4000 gall version. Usually noticeable on three-quarter shots of locos, once you know to look for it.

January 20

16 hours ago, Bloodnok said:

Have you tried curving any of Peco's Bullhead range before?

Not yet, but I hope to tackle some soon. I'm not expecting it to be fundamentally different.

January 20

It's exaggerated (taken on 2x telephoto). That's the point blade. I can induce a slight curve into it if needed but don't think it'll be be necessary - it's not like it's fine scale or anything (!)

January 19

15 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

That’s lovely.

Will doing this decrease the radius at one side and increase it at the other?

Yes - that's inevitable. However, the Code 75 3-way is a vastly superior item compared to its Code 100 equivalent - in fact, before someone else corrects me, it's not actually a 3-way per se; it's more correctly described as a tandem point. In Peco terms, it's a left hand and right hand medium radius point interlaced. I work on the basis of a med radius point being about 3.5ft, meaning that what I have done above steepens the left hand curve to about 3ft? Shouldn't cause a problem.

The primary purpose of what I've done here is to induce a shallow curve into the 'straight ahead' route, in order to maintain alignment at that part of the Upperby curve (approx 9ft at that point). What happens to the other radii is a consequence, not the driver. It'll make more sense once you see it in position.

January 19

This is more interesting ...

Curving a Code75 3-way point.

Actually quite easy. Peco have thoughtfully already provided a series of gaps in the webbing underneath so it's easy to induce a (gentle!) curve there. Just needs a few more nicks fore and aft and job done 👍

January 19

9 hours ago, philip-griffiths said:

Graham doesn’t use DCC, but a CBUS system of detectors, CANINP and mimic outputs would do the job with two wires…..

Nope, you lost me after the 'just two wires' bit ... 😵‍💫

January 18

As already spotted by philip-griffiths above, 'tis a jigsaw puzzle, an occasional weakness of mine 🧩

January 18

Nah ... go back'ards the other way. Think of all those other lovely Ds, Js, Ks (etc) you could have ...

January 18

1 hour ago, gr.king said:

For a split second it looked to me as if you'd hung that panel in the lounge.

I'd be sewing 'em back on again if I'd tried to do that ...

January 17

4 hours ago, ian said:

It'll look great when you've got all the occupancy lights wired and connected to the layout....

Well, first of all there's the minor matter of actually building the layout that it relates to ...

I may be gone some time 🤔

January 16

Ladies and gentlemen:

Looking down on proceedings from its new vantage point, I give you:

... the former track panel indicator board from Carlisle No.5 signalbox

STRICTLY speaking, it's the post steam era layout (dated 1969) and actually depicts the current layout (bar one or two minor alterations) ... but why let the facts get in the way. It's close enough.

My thanks in particular to @LNERGE of this parish who first made me aware of its potential availability.

There's even a cunning plan to fit new bulbs to it ...

😀

January 16

Only one item in the van ...

But it looks interesting!

January 16

There was a delivery last month.

January 16

The square-headed mice have been at it again.

More point motor installation, more wiring ...

... and another 'phew!' moment when it all goes back in, this time for keeps.

Underneath - for now - it's a rat's nest, pending installation of permanent control panel. But at least with pre-wiring done it's not quite as bad as it could be.

I was thinking that this could be the most complex part of the layout to wire up ... but I keep reminding myself of the southern end of Citadel station, or Carlisle No.5 as it's better known.

Talking of which ...

January 16

48 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

As you mention, the kit manufacturers of old will cease to exist, or at least some of them. Though DJH loco kits are still readily-available, what chance now for a kit for a BR Standard 2 2-6-0 78XXX?

Good morning, Tony

On your above point, is there not an adage / 'rule of thumb' that 90% of kits sold are never made ... at least the first time round? In which case, why be so concerned about kit manufacturers ceasing to produce any more? As you and I both know, there's a plentiful supply of unmade ones out there. As Anno Domini catches up on the current owner's 'kit mountain', they potentially get released ... to form the next generation's kit mountain!

The recent Little Engines O4/7 you built. That had been sitting around in its box for probably 30 years. Yet you were able to build it, no problem? On that basis, there's an existing supply of kits for the next 200-300 years!! OK, I readily admit an element of over-extrapolation going on there (does white metal eventually crumble into dust?) but hopefully you take the point. You can pretty much buy any kit you want to via the 'pre-loved', on-line market place.

I've commented in a positive vein on the associated thread you refer to. This wonderful hobby of ours has survived two world wars, nationalisation and the end of steam (potentially making the prototype less interesting?), earlier periods of significant cost of living rises (that make the current one look quite tame - I remember the 'shock horror' when a new loco breached the £20 mark in the late 1970s), etc. Currently we have a bewildering number of manufacturers, at least four mainstream hobby magazines (just in the UK), multiple shows each weekend in the main season. If we're suffering from anything, it's here-and-now-ism - one exhibiton ceases to operate and one shop ceases to trade and its the end of civilisation as we know it!

Oh - and talking of the demise of old model shops: weren't Beatties principally box shifters?

January 15

'Reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated ...'

Thanks Andy for providing a thread to bring together views on this. I'm definitely in the 'glass half full' camp. The brave new world features digital things and influencers like 'Sam's Trains' ... but that doesn't mean the hobby is dying, just evolving.

I'm one of those who believe there were too many shows pre-Covid - I certainly don't remember that many shows 40 years ago? And whilst it's a shock that a show like Warley has fallen by the wayside, there's certainly plenty of others to either visit or lug your layout to.

See you at Doncaster. And York. And Bristol. And Gaydon ...

January 15

13 hours ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

Passengers need a means of escape in the event of an accident, and any central door locking system needs some sort of override - it is not as simple as many people appear to think.

Indeed. If it were that simple, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The doors of the carriages in the Armagh (1889) accident were locked such that the passengers couldn't open them ...

January 15

15 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

... but there's some pointwork still to finalise at Upperby Juncs yet.

Talking of which ...

Yikes! An indication of the work involved. Note the two square holes to accommodate point motor plus switch. I pre-wire these - my days of being scrunched up underneath baseboards, trying to solder upwards in a restricted space are over (says he, boldly but naively).

Phew - that's better. The slips in the foreground are next ...

January 14

Continuing on at Upperby.

New boards corked and painted.

The central, removable piece already has track alignment pins in (3ft radius), so here I'm using these as a 'springboard' to plot the new alignment pins in either direction.

As always, entering the versines (offset of a pin from the two with side) as I go along.

Can you see them? To the right of the length of track with the coaches on.

And repeat, down at the Bog Junc end.

So we're ready for more tracklaying? Well ... yes ... but there's some pointwork still to finalise at Upperby Juncs yet.

January 13

13 minutes ago, MarkC said:

As the saying goes:-

"If you think that Safety is expensive, try paying for the aftermath of an accident..."

Mark

Absolutely.

The version of that adage I particularly like is:

RISK = HAZARD + OUTRAGE

(I believe that came out of the petro-chemical industry. 'Nuff said)

Like others on here, no doubt, I witnessed at close quarters the aftermath / outrage of Clapham, Labroke Grove, Hatfield, amongst others*. It's very real.

(*not to mention dealing with the consequences of people falling from open doors of moving trains. Campaign changing all the door locks on a 304 EMU. That was fun.)

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Gallery

Events

Exhibition Layout Details

Store

Posts posted by LNER4479