Keith Addenbrooke

I've been reading an interesting conversation on the prevalence of different narrow gauges used in the UK pre / post WWI including by contractors building other narrow gauge or industrial lines, but it's a bit hidden as it starts on page 3 of a different discussion in the Modelling section of the Narrow Gauge Forum: A question about HOn30 in the UK . So I thought I'd post a link here for anyone interested. Hope that's OK. Thanks, Keith.

For me, this photo already oozes atmosphere - I saw this and thought “deserted coastline” (only the panes still in the windows tell me the whole operation is not yet abandoned!). In other words: looking great already.

Just had a catch-up. I’ve not come across Nick Pautler’s layout before (referenced above). Very good. Very useful to see the Five79 video from Matt Chivers (I’d heard the HOn30 range was set for relaunch, but not the timescales). Given various issues with importing to the UK these days, a UK-based range could be really useful. My threads and questions don’t tend to generate much debate, but I think common ground has emerged in that a degree of freelancing (which I’m quite happy with) opens up numerous possibilities for US narrow gauge, with the Maine two-footers as a good start point. I think that’s a conclusion I’m happy with. Keith.

I thought it would be a good idea to try something simple with coffee stirrers before digging too deep into the bundle of 1000 I have for making some buildings. With a bit of plasticard left over and some time this week, I decided to start with a simple freelance freight car. I tried to take more care cutting the ‘components’ to begin with: And ended up with this: A load is needed to hide the holes where the trucks peep through, and there are no brakes (of any kind). I had some help with glue / gluing techniques from the NGRM Online Forum, but the main thing I learned about the coffee stirrers was that the score lines I scribed to make the sides look 4 planks high got too easily covered when painting. Trucks are Peco GR-106. (Note: the first photo also appears in my discussion thread on HOn30 modelling).

I think I can safely say that the inspiration for my little freelance freight car attempt comes from the layouts such as the C&DR - I’m just waiting for the glue to dry and then I can finish the painting and add the trucks: Scratchbuilding is new for me: the aim of this build was to see how I get on with coffee stirrer technology, as I’ve got a bundle of 1000 to try some buildings with. The main problem is coffee stirrers are 5mm wide (ideal perhaps for On30, but please don’t tempt me). I scored them down the middle before painting to give 2.5mm planks (still quite wide at 8.5” to scale), but the first layer of paint almost filled the score lines. I think I’ve also rather over-engineered the sub-frame trusses for this type of basic freight car - perhaps it was originally built as something else? I’m just having fun experimenting

To add to @Nearholmer’s post if I may, for those with access to Model Railroader back issues, the Carabassett and Dead River (C&DR) built by Bob Hayden and Dave Frary was in the Nov ‘79 MR, with a second part on the cover and inside the Feb ‘80 MR. Hayden’s plan to build a new C&DR was in the Nov ‘81 MR. An artist’s rendering of his waterfront scene (inspired by Wiscasset) remains one of my all-time favourite model railroad images - one of those I never forget. Hayden’s ‘finished’ model (which I think stayed true to his plan) was featured on the cover and inside the Sept ‘98 MR I think Hayden and Frary had built a couple of models in HOn2 1/2 (as it was known then) prior to all this, which appeared in Railroad Model Craftsman (RMC) but I don’t have the details. I believe one may have been called the Elk River? In terms of scratchbuilding, these are the components for my half-term project build: a simple open wood-sided freight car: I’ve got some Peco GR-106 (009) trucks (bogies) with integral NEM pockets and narrow gauge couplers to fit underneath. As I’ve said elsewhere - if I can do it, truly anyone can!

I don’t have a copy of Hilton, but Tony Koester gives it a strong recommendation in his Kalmbach Guide to (US) Narrow Gauge Modelling as the reference book to go for.

Hi there - if I could make a couple of simple suggestions: 1. While Yeovil Pen Mill quoted by @Kris is a UK example of a station with platforms both sides of a through line, a more common example would be to have the platforms outside the two main lines. If you wanted to do this, all you’d need to do would be to swap the lower platform with the track below it. You’d then have a platform on the outside and could put a low-relief station building along the wall as well. 2. This would make it clear to any observe that the two main lines are the bottom two running through the station, while the third line that feeds the sidings is a loop line - trains could be expected to run both ways through a loop line like this, which justifies the facing points off the main lines to get in and and out. 3. To make this easier on the left hand side, I’d bring the point for entering the loop down a bit, and move the crossover you’ve added above it - trains can then run through the ladder of points to get from the loop to the outside line. 4. The other thing I’d be wary of is the tight curves in the sidings at the top right corner - you’ll most likely find it very difficult to couple up coaches or wagons on those tight curves. It may be you need them for the length of trains you’re running, but an alternative would be to have slightly shorter, straight sidings that don’t go round the corner, and keep the top baseboard for a scenic run. You can certainly have fun running trains with a plan like this, and if your setting is a more modern one, the straightforward track arrangements would match the rationalised ones on the UK railway. Have fun, Keith.

A very enjoyable edition of the magazine: lots to read and reread, thank you. I especially enjoyed this month’s BRM TV. “Sandy Shores” is a fascinating and ingenious layout well worth another look, and I really liked the piece with @AY Mod sitting at his new desk and describing his next layout project. Home layouts in particular often have unique or individual origins that can (of necessity) get summarised very briefly in finished layout articles. I thought it was a great idea to spend a bit of time talking through the initial stages, explaining how the sub-frames have been sourced and built, and how the layout plan may develop around the sections being acquired as it all progresses.

I was trying not to... ...for exactly this reason.

And...finished: The roof is not glued on, so I can access the interior. Decals will be applied when they arrive - but what started out as a bit of fun with some spare cardboard for a rainy Bank Holiday weekend at the start of the month has progressed quite a way! Inevitably, the close up photos show things I can’t see from just a few feet away as I write this up. I’ve not been updating my parallel layout thread in the NGRM Forum over the weekend, but will catch up there soon (I know some read both). I also have a number of ideas for what to do next, but that’s all for now. Take care and stay safe, Keith.

With a bit more time after lunch, and confidence restored, I’ve been adding some details and glazing: First up: Window bars for the baggage doors. In my Mk1 test version, these were strips of card easily fixed behind the windows. This time I decided to try proper window bars: While the glue dried on these I hunted around for a suitable piece of plastic sprue to use as a chimney for the stove heater I imagine the car had: It’s starting to take shape: Glazing and Door handles (short lengths clipped from office staples dipped in glue) come next: The staples obey rule 1 of gluing things (they’ll stick anywhere except where you want). And do I really want to spend a free Sunday afternoon wrestling to fit short lengths of thin metal that can hardly be seen onto an end door, just so I can take a photo to say I’ve done it? Apparently I do! I’m just waiting for the paint to dry on the other window bars (which will be fitted on the inside like rails), then I’ll be done!

Next job will be to watch the repaint dry : It’s far, far, far from perfect, but I’m happy I’m back up the standard I can expect for this first attempt. Some surplus decals are being posted to me, which will enable me to add a road name later. Apologies for the “blow-by-blow” account of a very simple repair job - I share it as I think it’s made a difference. I’ve also learned I could use more patience in the earlier stages of a scratchbuild - as I don’t have a permanent workbench I can only do one project at a time, and am perhaps a bit too keen to be getting onto the next one. Another lesson learned!

It’s a fine morning here and I’m not working today, so chance to make some repairs before the day begins after all: I figured that improving the worst of the window frames should suffice, which meant just one piece on this side: I also decided it should be easier to make each new piece fit first, then carefully paint them to match later. More needed doing on the other side. The window frame I replaced is now made of four separate pieces glued in place - easier than trying to make a new one. One of the balcony ends was wonky (I’ve taken it off in the upper photo, refixed it by the lower): I applied the same technique to the top of the door frame and took a bit off the bottom - it is actually more square than the photo implies. I’ll see how it looks when painted, but am much more satisfied now: lesson learnt!

Trickiest bit of the assembly was the first - fitting the window frames and doors into the inner sides and ends: My cutting wasn’t as accurate as I’d hoped - it was easier in the Mk. 2 card model as I used thinner card for the window frames. With other builds starting to queue up, I decided to press on rather than spend more time redoing it all again. I realised the problem with the paint was using gloss paint - it had worked on card as it soaked in (so wasn’t as shiny). Switching to some Matt I had in stock has been an improvement: I’ll say the khaki I have is my tribute to Pullman Green. I still need to glaze the final one and refit the wheels, but here are the three models lined up for comparison: and a couple of shots of the final one as of today - this is my first model in plasticard, and the close ups show where I’ve not been very precise, although the roof is much better this time: The lesson I’ve learned here is that cut lines that look straight enough and close enough to being on measurement when I’m making individual components won’t look nearly as accurate when painted and assembled into the model if there’s any inaccuracy to begin with. It may be obvious, but having always built kits before the start of this year, it’s not something I’ve worried about before (the more I look at these photos, the more I’m tempted to do some revision work on the window frames after all, despite what I wrote at the start of this post: I’ll think about it).

Possibly the most awesome model I think I’ve ever seen! Quite fantastic @GW Jim! Not sure I’d dare try and paint it though.

Just came across this thread today while “wandering around Overseas Modelling” - very impressed: exactly the kind of continuous run layout I really like, and a wonderful choice of prototype. Look forward to seeing more. Thanks for sharing, Keith.

Just been catching up with some of the other active threads in this Forum - some incredibly high standard modelling: well done all! It really does provide encouragement. With the weather finally picking up, I’ll be hoping to do some baseboard painting as the next stage of my project, so I’d like to get my Combine finished. Switching from card to plasticard for the base solved the problem of fitting bogies, but it’s not as easy to make it look like wood. Plasticard also offers more resistance when cutting (partly as I just have one sheet of .040 thou to use). I did a test to make some plasticard balcony ends: The first photo shows both the start and finish (I prepared a spare set just in case). I scribed four pieces, which I gave two coats of paint and some simple dry brush weathering (not as good as I’d hoped it would be - more practice needed). I then cut out the four pieces and separated the individual planks from two of them, which I stuck in random order to the backs of the other two. The individual planks will be on the outside. I actually didn’t lose any! I’ve been doing little bits and pieces in odd moments during the week, but have decided to take the plunge and finish the build in all plasticard - this is no longer a practice piece, but one I hope to use. First up were the trusses: Then a full set of components for what is essentially a rebuild - reverting to a 4mm clerestory. To be fair, that part was easier with plasticard. Painting with primer has begun. Where I’ve cut out the doors, they will be stuck back into the parts they came out of - but as separate parts, not just scored (why not): Assembly will be as per the practice versions. Improving my weathering so it looks like old wood is the next challenge. Enjoy the Bank Holiday weekend, Keith.

Thank you. I’ve had a further play in between jobs this afternoon, and I think the wobble is mainly caused by using a single sheet of 1mm (.040 thou) plasticard for a clip 1.5mm deep - so fully one-third is free to wobble. If I had some .020 thou plasticard as well I could add another half thickness layer to the fixing plate. I’ve also added more weight, making the base double thickness when remodelling it as suggested with a solid fixing plate and a wider hole (4.5mm) as a recess above: I’ve also added the roof (not yet glued down). I made the clerestory taller (3mm top lights in a 6mm clerestory). This is twice as big as in my first, plain card version. It was much easier to cut, but I think the original proportions were better: It does run better now. I’m not planning to detail the interior for this particular practice model, so have just added a couple of card partitions, trying out different combinations (I have an endless supply of cereal box card, but I’m finding the thicker packing card is a better material for inner layers). That’ll be all for today. I need to make new sub-frames / trusses and finish the painting. For a total cost of a pair of bogies, and some valuable lessons learned, it’s a useful learning experience. I’m not sure I’d want to tackle anything much more complicated yet (certainly not a Loco body), but all I’ve had to buy so far are the bogies. Take care and stay safe, Keith.

A quick test of this morning’s progress before lunch: first the good news - the 40’ car doesn’t look too bad (to me) on a 9” curve: The unfinished model weighs 16gms, which is too light. I’ve noticed the 009 couplings are slightly higher than the H0e ones on my ZB coaches - I don’t know if this is an issue between the scales: The bogies do now run freely, but are very “wobbly” as a result of the way I’ve fixed them (I’ve decided my plasticard is .040 thou). My thanks to @BernardTPM for his much better solution, which I just didn’t see in time (the voice of experience). There’s still some work to do - I guess I’d expected the Peco bogies to just “plug and play” - in some senses they do, of course, but I’ve got some fitting to do still.

Thank you - that would be a stronger, neater and simpler solution than the one I thought of .

Moving into H0e / HOn30 is based on the idea I can make best use of the space I have, while staying in a scale I’m comfortable modelling in. The biggest test for this theory however comes with my next challenge: fitting bogies / trucks and couplings - with 9mm track I am effectively working with N gauge parts here. I’ve opted for the Peco GR106 freight bogies as they have a suitable ‘all-in-one’ design, and they arrived this week: I’d misunderstood the pictures I’d seen however, necessitating four adjustments: 1. The clip that fastens them to the vehicle is also the pivot (I thought it was fixed). This means the ring around the hole acts as the bearing. My simple cardboard base wasn’t going to work. 2. The maximum thickness needs to be no more than 1.5mm, so my 2.5mm base (top right in the photo) was too thick. 3. The coupler shank is a bit shorter on the GR106 than the Ffestiniog-style passenger GR104 bogies, so the hole needs to be 15mm from the end, rather than 20mm. 4. It’s a lower-slung fitting than I imagined - so the sub-frame trusses I’ve made are too deep and will need cutting down. Fortunately, I did have one sheet of plasticard in stock, a spare my Dad sent me to keep a magazine he posted flat in transit. I’m not quite sure of the thickness (it seems to be a bit over .030 thou - not quite 1mm?). I’ve made a new base which drilled neatly and enabled me to test fit the trucks and body: It seems quite a bit lower than the ZB comparison vehicle. It also failed to run freely, the reason for which became apparent upon inspection: The wheels are scraping the base above. I therefore need a thicker central bit for the truck to plug into. This will raise the whole car a bit as well. A second ‘shim’ layer of plasticard should do it, as long as it doesn’t become too thick for the clip to fit. I realise all this will be well-known to many: for me it’s all part of the learning. As I play around, my eyes are getting used to the small size, and the doubts I had as whether I could make this work are fading - I think I can still make this work. Keith.

Thinking about my post earlier today (previous page), I suspect it’s more likely to be the other way round: if I’m wanting to freelance, it’s something I don’t have to worry about - I can use whatever works / looks right for me. With a SG hat on, I have on occasions bought items of rolling stock / building kits I didn’t find particularly exciting in themselves, but bought them because they fitted into a project I was planning at the time. But, as @PaulRhB noted above, I’m one of those who enjoys the freedom to add something that takes my fancy that I can justify (at least to myself), even when it stretches things a bit far: I find that to be a more enjoyable approach. In the context of this discussion, I’d not really thought of it as freelancing - it’s accidental freelancing more than intentional. As that’s how I personally enjoy the hobby, I suppose it means that I’m not going to worry too much about my track either?

Off the Loco or the bridge?

I think gauge plays out in different ways: locomotives and rolling stock could get regauged (within reason) when moving from one railway to another - as an aside here’s a link to a photo of a brand new prototype Narrow Gauge diesel nearing completion, but currently fitted with standard gauge trucks to move around the works! Staying with American practice, some Narrow Gauge lines interconnecting with big railroads would swap the trucks under freight cars for each onward journey - seems a hassle but with longer distances to cover and more generous loading gauges, it was less inconvenient than transferring everything (the US isn’t the only place this happened of course). In model terms, I mentioned previously John Ahern’s Madder Valley, which I think essentially rescaled models to fit the gauge of his layout (as I also mentioned, I’ve not been to Pendon and seen the model - others will know more). I’ve been looking at Bemo European models, which are made with wheel sets that can be set to run on either H0m or H0e track - models built to a consistent 3.5mm scale, but flexible for gauging. The example list could go on - the popular and well made MinitrainS r-t-r range has a consistent 9mm gauge, but can be flexible on scale at times by all accounts. What it all boils down to, I suggest, is that the “NG mindset” we’re discussing perhaps takes the more relaxed view of gauge that NG prototypes often applied too. And after thirty years collecting OO models that’s got to be fine by me anyway .