drmditch

For me, half the satisfaction of my railway is study of the original and learning how best represent it within the limits of my abilities. My railway, currently being re-constructed, will never be to the standard which the best modellers achieve, but it's all mine and made by me! I probably spend as much if not more on books as I do on railway equipment. (trying to write this on my tablet and it keeps trying to correct 'girder' to 'border' !!!! Post to be completed from a proper keyboard!) EDIT As I was going to continue..... I am currently making the 11th girder of the 12 required for my 4 span girder bridge, based on Langley Moor Viaduct (aka Deerness Valley Viaduct) on the ECML, with some features from other ex NER/LNER prototypes. Some pictures and an account of it's history are posted here.....http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/105609-rebuilding-a-railway/page-2&do=findComment&comment=3182629 on post #31 There will be better pictures when the light is in the right direction.

Likewise. I sorted out mine into those I wanted to keep and those I did not. This meant a lot of interesting browsing. There was a lot of good stuff in the 1970s and 80s! The unwanted ones then got taken to the NYMR. So, two pleasurable tasks out of what could have been a chore!

Three out if the four spans of the girder bridge are made (well, nearly), and track laying on the mid-level line has progressed. As a rough guide to the railway, here is a (very) rough diagram I did some time ago:- (By-the-way, the mid-level storage as the main storage is also under the high-level terminus.) I now need to decide on a tricky piece of track design for the mid-level station. The closest NER example to what I need is Gilling East, in all it's 19th Century glory with a scissors crossover for a junction between it's two relatively minor branch lines. This is well described in Patrick Howat's 'The Railways of Ryedale' with a signalling diagram provided on page 60. In this layout both platforms were bi-directional and both were signalled as passenger lines. Trains to/from Malton and to/from Pickering could be signalled into either platform. My attempt to reflect this is :- There is only one platform line which will be bi-directional, and the loop line which will also be bi-directional will be freight-only. This provides what the NER called a 'Preceding Place' and several books (especially 'A History of North Eastern Railway Signalling' ed Neil Mackay from NERA) will allow me to work out a signalling diagram. The scissors crossover will be complex to make (although I have the required PECO items), and I am tempted to simplify the layout to reflect what was done at Gilling by 1955. (Shown on page 61 pf Mr Howat's book.) My problem with this is twofold. 1. Owing to the complexity of the baseboard structure at this location, linking point motors to the re-located crossover would be difficult. 2. It also (although this does not show on my rather basic SCARM diagram) shortens the loop very considerably. There is a third option, which provides the function I want, but doesn't seem to me to very prototypical, although, having said that is does have some resemblance to Border Counties Junction on the NCR. As will be realised, this railway is definitely a long term project, and it will be some time before I can actually construct the signalling for this, and all the other, locations! I would be very grateful for advice and opinions. In the meantime, it's back to bridge girder construction and measuring and planning (but not yet cutting) a scissors crossover. I think the NER didn't worry about complex pointwork, so why should I !

There has been progress since the last post on this thread, but taking pictures is a bit tricky, partly because there is so much clutter in the railway room. The basic carpentry is now complete for all three levels and for the cross-room viaduct. Track laying for the middle level is in progress. However, a great deal of time has been taken up with a bridge that crosses the garden doors at the south end of the room. This is exposed to full sunlight (unless I keep the blinds and curtains closed!) The model is notionally based on the Deerness/Langley Moor Viaduct on the ECML but adapted to single line form, and with a simpler form of girder work. I've used a Double Warren Truss as used by Thomas Bouch on the Belah Viaduct and the Tay Bridge. ( This is not as risky as it may sound, because some of the original Gilkes Wilson wrought-iron trusses were re-used on the replacement bridge, and we can still travel over them today!) Here is most of the eventual four span structure. Perhaps I should have taken the washing off the line before taking the picture! Because of the situation, this model reverts to very elderly techniques using : Card (from re-cycled cereal packets and other sources) Matchsticks UV stable varnish. The only innovative idea I claim for this structure was working out the Double Warren Truss design in MS Word, printing this on ordinary printer paper, and then gluing this (using a spray contact adhesive) to thin card. This was then cut out, and the webs, flanges, and straps built up using thin strips of card and matchsticks and quite a lot of sharp scalpel blades! The resultant girder is 'representational' rather than an accurate model, but I will need twelve of them. The viaduct is presumed to have been built in the 1870s, using wrought-iron Double Warren Truss girders, and strengthened sometime in the 1890s/early 20th century. (The NER did strengthen a number of bridges at this time.) Properly the central girder should have been replaced in steel, and probably in a plate girder form. However, because of the location of the model, I think it is more interesting to keep the 'see through' effect. So, two spans are complete, and two of the remaining six girders are built. Only four to go!

Thank you for the B16s. I really do hanker after at least one, and will monitor the LRM website.

PLease could I ask about the source of your lighting strips? (Sorry if I missed it earlier.)

This seems very similar to the S&D composite in Shildon

One is supposed to avoid impacts when sailing! (Sorry I can't remember which rule that is.) It was the cold North Sea and my arthritis that did not go well together. Cycling, while not quite as exciting, still provides open air, changing scenery and seasons, and exercise, with added railway interest! But then, I am fortunate to live in County Durham, with a superb network of paths using former railway routes. Not that the weather has been so far this year. Only 86 miles to date.

Sorry, post and editing overlapped. Detail pictures are in the edited post above. There is a 'top-side' picture here:- I can't manage many more pictures at the moment (what with the upper level being 'swung up' while tracklaying continues beneath. And I'm in the middle of bridge girder construction!

Re: Point (and even signalling) control :- Many, many years and four house-moves ago I devised a lever-frame arrangement to a little 'temporary' branch line. In my last railway, from the re-construction of which I have taken a brief break to write this), two such lever- frames were constructed for my top-level terminus. With considerable reluctance I have posted some pictures below. They make the system seem cruder than it actually is. Please excuse the bundle of wiring looped up while re-building is in process. The main advantages are:- Low cost - the major components can be made from materials to hand - Small offcuts of plywood, Sheet material for the frame structure (I originally used PCB of which I had a quantity in stock, but the one pictured below is plastic) Scrap rail for the levers Small pieces of brass sheet for the angle-cranks Small cheese head screws for angle pivots (with tube to make a 'stool') Suitable lengths of brass or piano-wire for the rodding. (this might be the most expensive, but originally used scrap rail Small lengths of brass tube for joiners/adjusters More brass rod for the 'through baseboard' cranks. Cable grips for keeping everything in place Can be engineered to fit your location Fairly robust (if crude) and easily adjusted All the 'works' are beneath the baseboard. Disadvantages:- Well, there are quite a lot. It is crude but it has worked for me for many years. If this whole thing is too crude (I still use Peco Code 100 track - not 'proper' construction like yours), then I apologise profusely!

Thank you. I found a copy on Amazon, and a timely birthday present allowed me to order it with a clear conscience! What I didn't stress in my initial post is that this bridge is just inside double-glazed garden doors which face due south. The deck is actually 1/2" birch ply which is fairly strong. It is nearly 4' long. If I make track using Code 100 rail and PCB it may not have enough flexibility to cope with heat expansion. If I use my normal 'old and clunky' Peco Code 100 and allow sufficient expansion gaps then it will probably cope. I have worked out a design using strips of PCB about 8" long with NS rail spot soldered to simulate chairs, and track joiners with sensible expansion gaps. I still worry however about the difference in expansion between the PCB and the rail. It may be better to emulate the NER and add additional under-girders into the design to support the (fictional) weight of a trough girder and ballast.

Please does anyone have any information about metal bridges having ballasted decks? Preferably on the LNER, North Eastern Area, prior to 1948. I am basing a model on Langley Moor Viaduct on the ECML, (otherwise known as the Deerness or Dearness Viaduct, but not the now-demolished one on the Durham Bishop Auckland line.) I think that it is now has ballasted track, but I suspect it would not have originally built that way.

Re: Gender of (Steam) Locomotives This was settled in the summer of 1830, by a young lady who became a renowned actress. She was a copious writer of letters and journals. Frances ('Fanny') Kemble, was on tour with her father's theatrical company in Liverpool in August 1830. On 26th August she was given a demonstration trip on 'Northumbrian', driven by George Stephenson himself. Extracts from one of her letters are quoted in 'Liverpool and Manchester Railway 1830 - 1980' by Frank Ferneyhough, "We were introduced to the little engine which was to drag us along the rails. She (for they make these curious little fire-horses all mares), consisted of a boiler, a stove, a small platform, a bench........She goes on two wheels, which are her feet, and are moved by bright steel legs called pistons; these are propelled by steam......." A little later - "this brave little she-dragon flew on..." She was very enamoured and impressed by George, and George did not object at all to the interest displayed by a glamorous young woman!. There is a good web-link here https://www.brainpickings.org/2016/08/26/fanny-kemble-railroad/ Scroll down about half-way to see more of the letter. Given such authoritative evidence who can doubt the correct use of female pronouns when referring to locomotives, although of course something like a P2, while remaining a classic Stephensonian locomotive, might have gone beyond the 'curious little fire-horse' stage!

Sorry if this is a silly question, but have you cleaned the bit? If my bits get very black (no d.e. intended) then no heat transfer takes place. Periodically I take a rough file to mine, and then re-tin. It is then a great relief when everything works again. PS - I am by no means any kind of soldering expert.

I suggest reference to the NER Book of Standards (available from NERA https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8TQ0uMwUhO9dFRlYy1NQ1RFazA/view ) Standard Post and Rail Fencing and Ditching (page 9) has posts at 6'centres, with five 4" rails spaced closer closer to the ground. There are other standards, for Platform Fencing etc. I Like the Standard Unclimable Fencing (page 12), but it might be quite complex to make! Most of them seem to have posts at 6' centres.

I agree with the contributors above, I really enjoy your updates. Your railway (despite being a bit far south, and not displaying the letters 'LNER' as much as I would prefer) is a major source of inspiration. If you do need to take a rest then I hope you will come back like a 'giant refreshed'.

Re: Locomotive naming and 4468. Isn't the Eider the fastest British duck? (But perhaps that would only be 'down' hill?)

But not, I think, Edwardian! (Built to operate at fleet speed with Dreadnought battleships which really were an Edwardian concept and another weapons system that never really worked as hoped. Nothing much wrong with the idea of a steam powered fleet submarine - just needed a nuclear reactor, different hull form, etc,etc.) Sorry, shouldn't get distracted even by your post of HM ships Camperdown and Victoria above. Now Victoria really was technology that didn't work, but perhaps the idea of forcing the Dardanelles could be described as 'what has been done before might need to be done again'. Interesting that some locomotive technology from the 1890's lasted into the second half of the 20th century, whereas poor Victoria stands on her bow (if she still does) of the coast of Lebanon. A tribute to the difficulty of developing processes for command and control at the same speed as the technology. (ref. Andrew Gordon 'The Rules of the Game'.) Perhaps railways were some twenty years ahead in that regard? Now I need to stop coughing and sneezing and get out of this warm bed and lay track! Worse things happen at sea you know!

Sorry if you have mentioned this before, but where did you obtain your bending bars?

Not on my railway!

Because we all strive, in our own way, to improve! Inspiration from others, such as your good self and other contributors to this thread and Mr Wright himself, is a part of this process. I need to learn so much, and to make better bolt-heads!

Please may I register an interest in a C6. (As in a V, with wide splashers.) I will send you a PM.

Thank you. I will try that.

I'm still re-building my railway, and haven't constructed any exciting engines recently (although I do have one in hand!), but here is an ex-GN Cattle Wagon. One of my New Year resolutions is to improve the standard of my detail modelling, but as far as I know there is no kit available for this vehicle, so this one is all my own! Source material comes from Peter Tatlow Volume 1, and Steve Banks' website http://steve-banks.org/images/historical/cattle_traffic/cattle_ex_gnr_e410234_2000_1200_72bu.jpg Some mouldings come from Parkside, but the sides were scratchbuilt inside the Parkside 'frame'. I'm quite pleased with the wagon plate though, which is just visible in the second picture!

Please excuse a question that I should perhaps have researched more. When did Darlington Works start using the (snaphead?) rivets that show so prominently on smokeboxes in BR times? I had assumed it was mid to late 40's.