Jump to content
 

Gruffalo

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    719

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Gruffalo

  1. Gruffalo

    The next decisions

    By Gruffalo,

    The decision on the layout's historical placement had to allow me to justify some of the locos I really wanted, some of which are already owned and painted in post-27 GWR green.. I wanted to be able to run Churchward's Stars (x1) and Saints (x2) and perhaps a heavy freight 28xx together with Collett's Castles (x2) and Halls (original, x2). At a more local level, some prairies, a Collett 2251 or two and at least one pannier. That pretty well set the period as somewhere around 1929 - 1932. I feel that the route restrictions applying to Kings, and the fact that they were only designated for the very best of express turns at that time, dictates against including one of these.
     
    My next conundrum was that of geographical location. I was tempted by Kingswear - where at least I could run the odd Castle - or that simple but effective station that is often modelled: Penzance. In either case, I was looking for a design that would allow a tender loco and six or seven 57' top-lights. With one shed wall of 3.4m, it seemed a shame not to use the length to best effect. So with those two options I knew I needed four platforms and at least one at 1900mm length. So now I had passenger traffic, what else would I need? Well, tender locos would need turning and I had followed a thread in which another RMWebber (Dah)) built an SE Finecast turntable so I bought one of those. In addition to passengers, I settled on livestock (to match the rolling fields surrounding the approaches to the station) with a cattle dock alongside the station, coal (because practically every mid-sized or larger station had some form of coal handling) and a brewery (only to justify a private siding and a Metcalfe's kit).
     
    The next issue was to try and avoid tight curves that would easily reduce the overall effect. At this point, a draft layout was posted on RMWeb and some really great help came from Jon_1066 to arrive at a potentially working arrangement with curved turnouts. It is surprising how tight things become even with a shed of these dimensions and I really didn't want a roundy-roundy - it had to be a terminus and trains had to arrive and depart for a destination. So now there was a plan. It involved 26 turnouts, only one crossing and almost 50m of track. Once I costed that, I had to draw in a (very) sharp breath.
     
    Alongside this, I had decided that I would use stall type motors to drive the turnouts. Cobalt seemed to be the route but then I had a chat to a supplier of these at one of the shows and was guided towards the Tortoise device. As these are a reasonable amount less than Cobalts, that suited my budget even though they are perhaps a little more bulky. As I already have a number of Peco, SEEP and old H&M solenoid type points motors (although some may be duff), and having seen some excellent layout videos with operating signals, I want to incorporate these. So, if working signals are to be included, they had to be correctly located and of the right type. Additionally, this would decide the size of the signal box. So, I know precious little about signaling but, with the resources of RMWeb, "I know a man who does" and the plan was sent to the oracle that is The Stationmaster. Several suggestions from him resulted in further track changes and one more turnout to achieve a really workable layout.
     

     
    Gradients are incorporated because the departing trains ultimately have to return and some measure of storage is necessary to "hold" trains so they don't just go straight forward and back but this does not need much description or even displaying - actually that is clearer since some of these loop under the main station boards. Suffice to say that he ruling gradient is 2%, another advantage of a spacious track plan. As yet, I don't know how well my locos will perform on that but I am optimistic that I can install enough weight over any drivers on the few r-t-r locos I have, the rest have white-metal bodies so have inherently more traction.
     
    Enough for now, planning the baseboards is the next step and that will expose more issues!
  2. Gruffalo
    The track plan is probably more Kingswear than Penzance but is really neither although the name clearly references both. I have a love of Devon & Cornwall in preference to South and West Wales so didn't research anything involving the Severn Tunnel in its connection to Headquarters. I did originally intend a river under the station approach (Kingswear has this and Penzance has one a little further up the line) but I have to start the gradient where the up and down main tracks on the plan displayed in the previous post end. I want to have a tunnel mouth soon after that so the two would conflict. Breaking the view of the layout seems important as it gives a sense of coming and going. I have already created Box Tunnel's west portal (the Box end) as a OO scale line drawing in AutoCAD to print on A3 so I can have the wrap-around effect of the sides. The basic portal won't fit on an A4 sheet, relics of the broad gauge obviously! Twerton's west portal will get the same treatment for the other tunnel mouth and I will make both available as pdf's once completed.
     
    I greatly admire those who have the skills, time and patience to construct their own track but I'm afraid I have to set targets that are achievable for me, given that I have a spouse who demands quite a bit of time and some grandchildren who need regular sitters and support, other life gets in the way of modelling all too frequently. The shabby pile that is Gruff Towers will be too much for us at some stage in the not too distant and life in a single storey building will beckon too so the plan incorporates the option to be dismantled and moved as and when necessary. Since I am not hand-building the track or turnouts, a significant investment was made in Peco's Code 75 Electrofrog turnouts from Northampton's Model Shop and a cutting list sent to my friendly nearby timber merchant J K Timber & Packaging who conveniently delivered everything to my door.
     
    Although I printed the whole layout track plan at full size, when I laid them out on the baseboard decks I found a notable difference between the plot and the physical devices. As I have several turnouts in series the errors are compounded. Surely I had made a mistake? No, checking and re-checking showed that there is a discrepancy between the Peco Code 75 components in AnyRail and the real thing! Rather than go back to the drawing board, I drew the track centre-lines on the right corner and its adjoining baseboard decks and after assessing the deviations, I decided that the best solution was to slightly tighten the radii of the main up and down lines on one side and expect that the platforms may be slightly reduced at the other end. That may result in 6 rather than 7 coach train formations but I will have to accept that, after all these stations would always have had 8 coaches or more arriving so yet another compromise. I am using Tortoise turnout motors to set routes so a clearance of 50mm radius from each turnout tie-bar centre has to be provided from any baseboard edge framing or cross-board support brace and this defines where the baseboard bracing bars can be mounted.
     
    The previous paragraph's issues have caused something of a delay whilst I adjusted everything. The route forward would seem to be that I construct the first two baseboards before doing the next adjacent boards with adjustments being made along the way. Thank goodness I didn't outsource building the baseboards according to my AnyRail track plot! Now, provided SWMBO doesn't provide a new list of tasks for me tomorrow and it isn't so cold I can't work outside, baseboard construction can begin properly with the two key boards. Hey ho, a new dawn brings a new day!
×
×
  • Create New...