Harlequin

4 hours ago, JimC said:

Yes (all of them on one or other!)

There were all sorts of combinations of frame setups, some of them quite eccentric to my eyes.  Quite a few of the 2-4-0s had inside frames for the driving wheels and outside frames for the leading wheels. Maybe it made for more room round the cylinders. Actually, you've got me wondering now, what were the cylinders fastened to on a locomotive with just outside frames?Must look that up.

And you remind me of an excellent point. I need to make very sure I've distinguished (correctly) between outside frames and double frames (or even part and part!)

I know you're concentrating on tender locos but, FWIW, the contemporaneous Metro's inside frames were continuous front to rear and the apparent outside frames for the leading wheels were outrigger extensions. So I suppose the leading wheels were, in effect, double framed.

The cylinders were entirely inside the the inner frames and the only help that this arrangement gave to cylinder placement that I can see was that the axle of the leading wheels passed under the slide bars and piston rods.

Phil

Hi Jim,

Have you seen Longworth's rolling stock books? He is not afraid of a huge index. Although it appears to be daunting at first it is in fact very useful.

For instance, the GWR coaching stock is categorised by the diagram prefix letters and increasing diagram number within each category. Within each diagram entry all of the running numbers are listed with brief notes only where something exceptional needs to be noted. The index is ordered simply by running number and it Xrefs the diagram number not the page number the diagram is on. That works because the diagrams are laid out in logical order.

So, the first actual coach entry is diagram A4 (he only lists coaches that survived into BR ownership). Conversely the first entry in the index/list is W15 which refers to diagram S11, near the far end of the entries.

Another thing Longworth does is to keep the actual entries very terse by using symbols and abbreviations which are described in a key section at the start.

Since Lot numbers are really the stepping stones through the loco history, and the main identifier of jobs in the Works, I think it makes sense to use them for the main categorisation and list the running numbers as attached info. (That should help a bit with running numbers that were re-used because they will be naturally separated by Lots.) But that would need an index of running numbers that reference the Lots so that readers who know a running number can find the details they want in the Lot list.

Phil

Something about that format doesn't feel right to me.

I think maybe it doesn't explain the actual development strongly enough. The reader has to tease it out for themself - and there's not enough detail to be able to do that in this format.

Take sandwich frames, for example. From a development perspective, it would be good to know why they were introduced, when, which classes used them, notable cases and exceptions, pros and cons, when they fell out of use and why.

That's just my tuppenny worth.

Hi Jim,

I think that the reader might want to follow their own path through this huge matrix of information, to suit their particular interest, and so a format that is heavily cross-referenced might be a good way to go. For example, a section about a class (or a lot?) might then refer to other locos built the same year, at Swindon, at Wolverhampton, with the same boiler, same valve gear, etc. etc. all with page references so that the reader can flick to them. Maybe supplemented with some indexes arranged in different ways.

That might also be helpful in separating the interesting content from the drier relationship details?

Thought: The changes in development that you are tracking mainly occurred between Lots so I wonder if Classes are the right way to divide up the content? Perhaps Classes should be another cross-reference - although obviously a very important one.

(Thanks for the link to the errata - very useful.)

Phil

What a wonderful account of your intrepid trip! Even with all the modernisation there is still a lot of steam-era infrastructure to be found and admired. (And some of the modern stuff looks quite good, too!  😉)

At Newbury did you mean "Lambourn and Winchester bays"?

Small update: Driver Pibworth is mentioned in both "The Locomotive Exchanges" by Cecil J. Allen and very briefly in "Swindon Steam 1921-1951" by Kenneth J. Cook.

I get the feeling that Pibworth and the other "foreign" drivers in the exchange trials were "reined in" slightly by their pilotmen (GWR drivers who knew the routes). They made sure the foreign drivers adhered absolutely to all speed restrictions whereas the local drivers knew what they could get away with.

2 hours ago, Neal Ball said:

Morning Phil 

Very interesting blog.

 

After the recent software changes, the images are missing on this blog, any chance of adding them back in?

 

Thanks.

 

Thanks. Images found and replaced.

Absolutely wonderful, Mikkel!

I can imagine the station staff "effing and jeffing" as they struggle with the slippery little beggars and shocked young ladies having to be escorted away from the scene, having never heard such language before.

1 hour ago, deepfat said:

Not treally related but what is the second front bogey truck for? I want t try and experiment with removing the front nem pocket on it

I think the second bogey is simply so that you can modify one and leave the other in original state, with an NEM pocket.

It looks like I cut the NEM pocket flush with the cross beam on mine and the glued on a rectangle of black plastic to hide the hole.

How steep is the coaling ramp, taking the transitions from level to grade and back to level again into account? Is it workable and will it look right?

When the scene is fully developed can you reach the back without damaging things at the front? 3ft 6in is a long reach.

How are coal wagons moved between coaling stage and storage sidings without trapping the loco? There is no run round loop.

Hi Alan, The dioramas look great.

Will any of them work for the Big Four era? (Steam at it's zenith rather than steam in decline?)

Hi again,

You have everything under control, by the sound of it.

I just stood a small prairie on a Peco Small Radius turnout to get an idea of your release spur and, yes, it will fit fine. I misjudged the length in your plan photo above.

If you have insulated the frog rails, even leading into your sidings then, yes, that's exactly what you need to do for DCC.

Good luck. I will follow with interest!

Phil

Hi GWL,

• Code 75 track is a good choice IFF you intend to run modern stock on it. Older stock may have larger wheel flanges that may bump along the chairs.
• The loco release spur is worryingly short. Are you sure your largest intended loco will clear the points?
• The sidings are all very short.
• I'm sure you've got insulating joiners in the relevant places for DC. That will basically be fine for DCC too but with DCC you may want to keep sidings powered up while the points are against them and in that case you may need more insulated joints. If you haven't allowed for this don't worry, you can always slit the rails later on.
• Is your station at the end of a single or double track line? If single, like Clevedon was of course, then the plan suggests that the run round loop extends off scene and so why is the central crossover needed?
• The throw distance of the slider switch is probably not exactly the same as the throw of the points. So without an "omega loop" you may find that either the blades don't move properly or the wire-in-tube is under pressure from the switch, leading to potential mechanical failure in the future.

Hope that's useful.

Hi Mike,

For your varnish simulation I suggest you set the transparency "Blend mode" of your overlay to "Multiply".

Don't forget the effects of the varnish that was applied in multiple coats. It's not clear whether the sources include that or are describing the base colour.

The underlying colour may well have been one of the more saturated colours you;ve described but there were probably at least 5 coats of varnish on top in your period, each one giving a slightly brownish tinge to everything underneath it, including lining.

And to make things more complicated the effects of heat on the varnish would cause it to become slightly cloudy.

It's possible to simulate these effects by overlaying semi-transparent layers in your favourite drawing/painting software. That might be informative and is probably easier than trying to mix a representative colour "by hand".

Hi kitpw,

This looks wonderfully evocative of time and place. Very clever idea to have scenery below the railway. Beautifully drawn track plan.

You pointed out that Uxbridge Vine Street only had one passenger platform but your plan above appears to have two or three. Can you explain a bit more and how it, or they, will be operated?

Brilliant! And educational!

Somewhat tangentially I am reminded of Trumpton and Miss Lovelace in particular:

Have you thought about animation? Netflix might come a-knocking...

I checked and double-checked that there really was a polarity crossover between loco and tender then, feeling like a bomb-disposal expert, I cut the red and black wires in the tender between DCC header and loco connection plug.

Stripped them and soldered red to black and black to red, slid heatshrink sleeves around the joins, pushed everything back into place and plugged in a new decoder.

Success! Tintagel Castle runs smooth and slow. I can't give it a proper run-out yet because I'm waiting for some track glue to set after my cat ripped up another section...

I agree with Haymarket47. You can't blame the technology unless you've investigated what actually went wrong and why.

Hi Steve,

I remembered that that signal was temporary, I just hadn't twigged before that it was upper quadrant! Funny what you notice and what you don't.

Yes, no problem updating the signal box diagram when the time comes.

It's looking great, Steve!

I like all the signalling details and the working signals - how are they operated?

I've just noticed that the Down Home bracket signals are all upper quadrant, unlike most (all?) of the others. Erm...

Thanks David,

Do you mean diagonals inside some of the "cells"?

Thanks Steve!

I justified buying the table saw combi machine on the basis that I've got lots of joinery still to do in the house. It was a bit of a luxury (and it took a huge effort to get it up the the shed) but I think it is proving it's worth. (Especially on railway things!)

The mitre saw was another difficult-to-justify purchase at the time but, oh boy, does it make life easier! Cutting is so much faster and more accurate than doing it by hand.

My Grandad was a carpenter and when I'm working in the shed I often wonder what he'd make of the fantastic tools available to us today.

I omitted to mention that this compact area also contains: the signal box, which is just at the end of the short platform, a goods siding and the Pen-y-bont Inn just behind the level crossing.

This beautiful little place was made to be modelled.

I take it to mean that every modeller has the right to decide for him/herself where he or she draws the line between making things and buying things.

In fact, that could be seen as one of the "Rules", and might be useful in defusing a few arguments!