Keith Addenbrooke

That is the world I grew up in (give or take a few DMU’s).  Perfectly captured - thanks for bringing this back, Keith.

I’ve received a great deal of helpful advice and encouragement since I began trying my hand at Narrow Gauge modelling again in early 2021.  Today I had the chance to give something back, with a small display at our local 009 Society Group meeting.  I’ve never seen myself as a potential exhibitor - at any level - but this morning I carefully loaded the car boot with my complete collection of bubble wrap, a couple of my IKEA modelling tables and the collection of models that have been featured in this thread, and headed off:

The aim of my display was quite simple - to pass on my thanks for the help I’ve had, and to (hopefully) encourage others:

My thanks also to all here in the Narrow Gauge modelling Forum on RMweb for the encouragement too!

I made sure there was room on my tables for essential supplies, and sat down to enjoy a day talking model railways:

At the end of the afternoon, when the hall was less busy, I did tidy away the notices and ran a few trains to finish the day.

While I hadn’t managed to complete the Church kit in time for the exhibition, as a work-in-progress it proved to be quite a talking point, as did the variety in the models I have - while my flitting about from one project to another makes progress on my layout ideas difficult, today it was an advantage, as I had more to show than I’d realised.  A very nice day.

When I began this thread in April 2021, I had grand ideas for a first H0e layout.  I didn’t appreciate I was biting off more than I could chew at the time, but while my layout ideas have been simplified, it’s given me more time for trying some modelling, which I’ve discovered I enjoy far more than I thought I would.

Other than completing my Church kit (it’ll be done by Christmas, just don’t ask which year), I have actually now completed all the different things I wanted to try out in order to get started.  It means this beginner’s thread is now basically complete, and I’m happy to draw it to a close on an unexpected high note.  I’ll be back when the next project starts.  Thanks to all, Keith.

Hi there, to make it more realistic, one option would be to run the engine shed off the Centre road (using a single slip point if you’re familiar with them) rather than back from the goods sidings.  As it is you might have to shunt wagons out of the way to get in and out of the engine shed:

Just a thought.  An idea some people use to help with scenic layouts is to angle the tracks so they’re not parallel with the baseboard edge.  Even a two or three degree slant makes quite a difference visually if there’s room.  Hope that helps, Keith.

An idle thought: is it a coincidence that Peco launched exactly 8 variants of the wagon - the precise number needed for a classic Inglenook shunting puzzle (per Alan Wright’s original)?  Just a thought - given CJ Freezer’s promotion of the Inglenook concept.  Have a good weekend, Keith.

(PS: to any charge of unfounded speculation - Guilty!)

Thanks @Phil Parker, I think it looks stunning.  RRP for the DC version of £167.99 seems very reasonable to me for a loco with this level of detail (Gaugemaster are taking preorders at £155.00 - other suppliers are available).  Looks like a winner to me, Keith.

Time for a pause. 

When I began this thread almost a year ago, I wanted to move on from my earlier research oriented thread, Modelling the ATSF in 1970 in HO .  I hoped to progress to layout building and am grateful to all who've contributed to this new thread, especially for patience when progress has been minimal (or even slower).  I'm one of the least practical people you'll ever meet, so I was never likely to get much done quickly, even before various 'off-field' events slowed me down further (such as the damp walls on page 1).  My grand ambitions and ideas haven't changed, but modelling for me primarily takes place between February and October, due simply to busyness in the run up to Christmas.  So now is time for a pause. 

There is another reason.  While I'm not changing jobs, we may be re-housed due to various issues with this property (not just the damp).  Until it becomes clearer whether that can happen, it makes sense for me to focus on my other, smaller projects (that are less space-dependent).  It may therefore be a while before I next update this thread.  Obviously I'd hoped to get further than I have this year, but I've had fun and learnt a lot, which I hope may be of interest to others thinking about starting out.  Thanks, Keith.

10 hours ago, ISW said:

Well, that turned out to be more 'interesting' than even I expected, based on the number of responses to your photo.

 

I must admit that I too use 'load spreaders' between the 'weights' and the objects being glued. However, latterly I was using a plethora of 'map pins' to hold the track down to the foam underlay whilst it was gluing. I found it was easier to keep the track in the desired alignment while the glue set if I could 'see' the track. Covering in weights made this a bit hit-n-miss.

 

Ian

I'm not an expert track layer by any means, but I found a variation on the map pins technique I've been taught very effective:

Track is aligned using standard drawing pins or map pins which can easily be moved until satisfied (I had more drawing pins):

The drawing pins are then replaced with spare track pins that can be tapped down to rail height, allowing final testing with rolling stock and then weighting down in place.  Pins are pulled out after glue has set:

Hope it's OK by Paul for me to share this here, but as someone who personally doesn't enjoy track laying I found this technique was very effective.  My track is 009, Keith.

7 hours ago, Les1952 said:

As far as incorrect or missing details are concerned-

 

I'm going to wait until I can see them standing on the layout, and moving on the layout.

 

Then I'm going to see just how much I'm able to spot wrong with them in the circumstances I want them to perform under.

 

Out of the showcase and away from the magnifying glass I suspect the biggest thing I notice will be the unprototypical buckeye couplings (Easi-shunts)

 

Les

 

I've not got any of these wagons yet, but my experience with Tillig TT with the same couplings was that they seemed to look more obvious ("worse") on a single piece of rolling stock, but a rake coupled up didn't look too obtrusive at all - I think the way the couplings overlap each other reduced the impact and I was impressed, Keith.

34 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Ah, so it was paper!

 

I misread as APCM.

 

By which mistake I’ve learned something extra.

That one I got straightaway.  We don't usually need much chlorine though.

Intriguing - do tell us more (do you have an overall shot, for example?), Keith.

1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Paul

 

When glueing cork or track down I place a sheet of ply or chipboard on top and then the weighty objects to spread the loading.

Agreed - this is how I glue wider sheets if cork down: usually left for several days too (until the next modelling session). Not had any sheets lift yet despite my baseboards being regularly carried around the house / stored vertically:

Less weight is used for track, Keith.

Very impressive smooth running - those 1 plank bolster wagons are very light and wouldn't be easy to add weight to (I don't find they need much: just the load seems to be enough for mine).

Even more impressive however is the signal in the second video - nice 'bounce' as well as smooth operating and clear lighting.  Excellent, Keith.

Next up, finishing the boxcars.  The final task was to add the high brake wheels and (simplified) rods.  I started with some left over thin styrene rod which was glued in place then cut to size (just needed scissors).  Brake wheels are again trolley wheels from an old OO gauge luggage trolley I was given.  The styrene rod seemed OK for the longer down section, but I had my doubts about the top part even when I was gluing them in place.  After leaving them for the glue to dry they were still wobbly, so I used a 7mm (scale 2’) section of left over brass rod and superglue instead:

First attempt:

Second attempt:

And finished - just a touch of black paint and a dab of grey weathering before the Peco trucks were clipped back into place:

For a layout as small as the CAL, these freight cars (plus my Minitrains caboose) should be sufficient, at least for now:

Finishing the craftsman Church kit now moves to the top of the list.  Quite a lot to do on that still (mainly the roof).  Have a good weekend, Keith.

Appears the wagons are now in shops.  Couldn’t get to my local model shop today, but I do have an email advising my small initial pre-order (just 2 wagons) has been processed, Keith.

Weathering - one of those aspects of modelling that does rather terrify me.  I figured the CAL tank car would be rather worn and dirty, so for the first time I’ve tried adding two layers of grime: first a simple base layer of light and dark grey:

This doesn’t look right as it stands - the dirt seems to avoid the edges and joins, whereas in reality that’s often where it gathers first.  The second coat of some indeterminate grimy green (actually olive yellow) remedies that and adds more on the top, where a tanker would probably be dirtiest:

I also tried representing some streaks down the lower sides using a thinner brush.  The technique is very simple - dry brushing which is then smeared a bit more with a piece of kitchen roll.  Happy to call this one finished now, Keith.

Next step with the tanker was to add cables which I superglued in place under the chassis then painted black:

The top inlet valve is a simple butterfly clip with the legs cut back and pressed into the cork.  I used enamel paint for the cork in case water-based acrylic causes the cork to swell.  Final step was to add some outlets taps pushed into holes made in the cork (N-Scale buffers saved from the same Kato 11-110 chassis mentioned previously). A dab of aluminium paint, reattach the bogies and we’re just about done:

When all the paint has dried thoroughly I can weather the tank to finish, Keith.

Delighted you have a layout space - look forwards to seeing how it develops, Keith.

(Great painting on the figures too of course)

8 hours ago, melmerby said:

A candidate for "Just like a model"

I hadn’t looked at the picture in that way, but now you mention it - definitely.

What stood out for me when I first looked at the photo was the empty highway on the left just behind the houses, suggesting more room was available (that street does look very narrow).

I’m guessing that historically the town may have built up around and along the railroad track, which may have been the first thing there.  Just a thought, Keith.

45 minutes ago, AndyB said:

Happy to throw little ideas in Keith.

The way I'd look at it is to imagine Min@rie$ without the little loco spur for the station pilot. Less fun and maybe it'd only really eork when using EMUs/DMUs.

Throw in the loco spur,  et voila! 

I think you'd get the same result here.

And as you say, add in servicing facilities and you've elevated the interest even further. 

 

Thanks Andy.  I've been thinking of manually changing stock on the scenic staging track between operating sessions.  I only really need a single track for staging (except when running passenger trains as well as freight), as by the period I'm looking at many US Branch Lines / Industrial Spurs would only run a single train per day at most, and for short lines it can be far less than that - down to an 'on demand' only service.  It's something I explored in my previous American thread focused on the Santa Fe and is a difference between US and UK branch line modelling (over here we tend to stretch the imagination and run a more varied service than would be realistic - served by a multi-track fiddle yard).

Your idea adds character to that side of the layout.  Perhaps the best (model) example I can think of is on Tom Johnson's Cass County HO model RR, an amazingly inspiring simple room-sized shelf layout.  He has a blog on the American MRH forum - here is a link to his post about the loco tie up point:  Tom Johnson's Cass County (on the MRH Forum)

Thanks, Keith.

Thanks @AndyB, some useful thoughts as always.  I’d not thought of including a loco tie-up point in the staging yard area, but I can think of several examples now that you mention it, perhaps with a small (portable) office and roadside access for a fuel tanker - and not only on shortline railroads.  An interesting idea, thank you, Keith.

14 minutes ago, Northroader said:

With grab irons on plastic car sides, why don’t you make them from brass rod shaped into a staple, position them on the side with a coffee stirrer underneath at right angles, then apply a hot soldering iron. They just sink down into the side, and the stirrer stops them before they go too far. There may be just a little bubble of melted plastic round the base of each one to trim off, but I find it’s quite a good way to do it.

Thank you - I would never have thought of anything like that.  As the grab iron fastening points on these scratch-aid kits are 5mm wide, a standard coffee stirrer is the right size too (maybe trim a little to allow for the width of the brass rod).  While it would be a shame to melt the moulded fastening points, the end result would be better: look closely and my irons are generally resting against the car sides, whereas they should be clear of the sides for finger / toe holds.

If I understand the technique correctly, the soldering iron is only pressed against the metal ‘staple’ - heat transfer does the rest?  I wouldn’t rate my chances trying to hold a soldering iron against plastic, however briefly.  Presumably a job to be done with the windows open?  Thanks for the suggestion, Keith.

There is a suggestion on an American site that the owner of the archive sadly passed away earlier this year. I’m afraid I can’t verify this, but it would explain the situation.  Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I can’t access the site either, Keith.

While my practical modelling has shifted back to Narrow Gauge as planned, I’ve had time to try a more layout design ideas here too.  Working with the actual baseboards, stock and structures (where built) is definitely helping me frame my ideas.  I had a quick count and I’ve already taken more than 80 photos from different angles or of different arrangements - I’m not going to post them all here of course, but just wanted to show a flavour of what I’m learning in case it’s helpful.

Perhaps most significantly, I’ve not started with the main boards - but with the other parts of the layout.

I looked at the centre module first.  As there are curved rail joints crossing the baseboard at each end, I think it makes sense to limit these to just one entry / exit point on each side:

I did consider the suggestion made by @AndyB of using a lineside industry as a view blocker, with a curved switch for access to the spur, but I couldn’t get it to quite look right for me.  As all the coupling / uncoupling on the through line would need to take place on a curve, my thinking at present is to keep this as a scenic baseboard.

I then moved to the staging board on the left.  I have three basic alternatives to the conventional 3-track staging yard I scoped out when measuring the baseboard for construction.  The simplest is this one, based on an earlier mock up:

A second one adds a switchback spur into the corner - which would add to the switching moves needed when operating:

There is enough space for the switchback to operated without everything else getting clogged up as well.

Finally, a run-round could be included in the same space if desired:

As you can see from the photos, I’ve also tried various combinations of different industries.  The card flat is for the Bud’s Trucking Kit I’ve bought.  

Personally, at the moment, my favourite is the simplest one with a single staging track and a single stub end spur.  Before I consider my approach to the main boards, I think it’ll be useful to know what my thinking is for the staging side, so I can build in some balance to the design.

I’ve already looked at ideas that use either more or less track and turnouts.  There’s a trade off between operation and simplicity, and my current thinking is leaning towards simplicity - not cramming in all the track I can.  It fits my current preferences when it comes to looking at other layouts and clearly scores well when it comes to achievability (so it could actually happen), but would I get bored?  That pendulum is still swinging to be honest - the younger me would undoubtedly have gone for the maximum operation capability, but the older (wiser? - I doubt it) me is more interested in the simple approach and spending modelling time making things, not just running trains.

One possible main line profile looks like this:

Visually however, I’m thinking I’d prefer to have the Station building / Depot on the other side of the tracks, shown here in an earlier iteration:

Some I know would decide much faster than me, and have something built already (many times over by now!), while others would call out my use of Peco Code 100 (UK / European) Flextrack as an obvious anomaly (fair point), but I am enjoying this phase of layout design - and with several narrow gauge models to complete am in no rush.  Have a good week, Keith.

A lovely model - really makes me think I should add a Scottish BLT micro to my own layout bucket list!  Hope the Covid doesn’t hit you too hard.  Thanks for sharing the pictures - genuinely inspiring modelling, Keith.

Time to press on with my existing builds.  I must admit that making and attaching 72 grab irons for my three box cars (6 per side - including ends - per car) wasn’t something I was looking forwards to.  I’d saved the thin brass rod from some Dundas Coach kits to use (it was supplied for window bars, which I made with styrene instead):

I used superglue to attach the rods to the painted plastic, but couldn’t avoid making a gobby messes of a few of them.  At least they’re done now.  

Next step was to fit the roof to each car.  I discovered I’d omitted to paint one edge of them, so there as a delay while the red paint dried.  The edges were then dry brushed (after the photo was taken) to dull the red:

Having experienced problems with a standard gauge boxcar where I needed to remove a roof, I’m trying to fix these just at the ends, using Glue ‘n’ Glaze rather than cement as the adhesive.  Brake wheels are being donated from an old OO gauge station trolley from my bits box:

On to the flat cars.  Wooden sides were added to the second long car, and then the bases painted.  While it was standard practice to hold the sides in tension with metal rods between the stanchions, I’ve also seen photos of cars without them, so have done without (as with my Mk1 gondola):

I’ve gone for an olive yellow / green livery this time, based purely on the paint I have open and needing to use up.  End rails are a bit small - they were cut off a pair of Kato 11-110 chassis so are actually N-scale.  Given this, I attached the brake wheels to the sub-frames of these cars rather than the end rails, where they would be too low:

Bogies are simply clipped in place through pre-drilled holes and these two are done:

Finally, progress on the small flat car.  I only had one more end rail in stock - also a spare from Dundas Coach kits.  As this is to 4mm scale (albeit for a Ffestiniog-style coach), I could try and end rail brake wheel, again from a luggage trolley.  The brake wheel and rod are superglued in place: I’ll see tomorrow how well the glue has dried, or if a rework is needed!

The wine carrier tank has been glued in place, with a couple of wooden strips for stability.  My plan is to add cables as well, but I’m leaving things as they are to dry overnight now:

Unfortunately the writing on the other side is upside down, but after a few bottles of red, I don’t think anyone will mind.

Have a good week, Keith.