unravelled

I think I might have to resort to the backup idea, which is a base with slots for peco sleepers. It'll mean cutting out the webbing, but I can probably get away with more widely spaced sleepers. I had thought to make the base no wider than the sleeper length, but on second thoughts, it might be better to make it as wide as the worst overhangs, so that if the track fits, I know the stock will too. In which  case I could  just print "combs" for inside and outside sleeper ends, and avoid web cutting.

Thanks

Dave

I am looking for help in finding a suitable .stl file for creating   sleeper  base for peco code 100 rail on a filament printer. I have tried several searches, but not yet found anything  suitable.There must be  a knack to searching the sites, but I haven't found it yet.

The application I need it for is a simple fixed radius curve (26" at track centre) which I need to be rigid, to define an awkwardly placed and constrained curve. Fidelity is not important so oo or ho, sleeper or slab would be OK The only real need is for the finished track to be the same height as, or less than,  code 100 streamline.

I think I have alternative ways of solving this, but thought 3d printing might be an easy option. I'm sure there is something out there, but whether it can be filament printed reliably  is another matter.

Any leads or help would be appreciated, even a "don't try it " would be useful...

Thanks

Dave

Does the budget cap extend to financial consultants and legal fees?

To suggest another possibility, have a look at the picaxe system, https://picaxe.com/

This uses basic as a control language, which means you are programming rather than coding, but   the end results can be similar, especially at beginner levels. The system is geared for education with  deals on chips in classroom quantities, as well as a range of starter kits. There is lots of good documentation.

hth

Dave

Thank you so much, that's ideal. It's the wooden post variety, which makes one decision for me. The only worry  is how much more I'll spend at Wizard, on other signalling bits...

I did do some searches, honest, but by using tablet, all I got was lots of links about using wireless devices on modern trains. Knowing the right words makes it so much easier.

Thanks again

Dave

I am trying to accumulate the parts needed for my layout build, (Wylde, based on Thame)..  My current search is for  tablet pick up and set down apparatus. I will fall back on scratch building if necessary, but wondered whether there there was a model or kit I could look out for.

Out of interest, when installations were changed from wood to steel posts, would all apparatus be changed at the same time, or would a mixture of wood and tubular posts be possible?

Thanks

Dave

Gosh, less than a year since the last post. Patchy progress continues to be made. Most of my effort has been in preparing drawings for the train shed and footbridge. In real life the footbridge must have been shoehorned into the available space. One detail just visible in some photographs is that the columns at the  west end have been narrowed to make room for the stairs. Realising this has made it easier to fit the bits together.

While I have been able to find a number of useful photos from the internet, David Bigcheeseplant has again been very helpful with photos and drawings, even finding and copying drawings of the footbridge ironwork, which resulted in a major rework of my guesstimations, and drawings which better match the photos..

The current phase is working out how to convert these drawings into something which can be built. I have been playing with my Aldi 3D filament printer, and so far my plan is to create truss units, with separate wall/end/roof  panels.After a lot of failed tests I have decided that I will probably print the wall sections as separate inner and outer units, to avoid having to deal with issues with support on double sided structures.

These are some of the more successful  recent prints, shown after a quick spray of primer, both on their own and in front of images of the originals.

       
 Board and batten siding test

Interior framework test

One obvious thing to do is rotate them 90 degrees in the printer, to orient the finish strands in the wood grain direction. Also some tweaking of the timber widths is needed, as they are a bit heavy at the moment. Trial and error is determining how much detail can be reproduced. To be honest, prints are better than I had expected.

For those interested I have been making the many iterations of the drawings in Turbocad, redrawing until levels, widths etc.  match known dimensions and images. The drawings are all being done full size, in inches, as it saves having to convert the known dimensions. It also makes estimating from timber sizes, steps etc. easier for me. At one stage I was considering  transferring finished drawings into Fusion 360, but I am now trying to do it all in Turbocad. I am fairly happy with the 2D part of the process, but learning the 3D'ing process hasn't been as easy as I had hoped. Once I am happy with the 3D drawing I save it from Turbocad  as  an stl file, which I can open with Cura for printing. One of the quirks of some of the file formats is that they make assumptions,  ( or possibly have defaults I have yet to alter). For example, although I draw in inches, the stl file doesn't take that on board, and when I import into  Cura, the image has shrunk by a factor of 1/25.4, because it has assumed the units used are mm. Actually this works to my advantage, as by reducing them to 1/3 the linear size again, they come out at 4mm/ft.

The other issue I have been thinking about is pointwork. In making a model close to scale with commercial pointwork, the issue, to me, is not so much about getting the correct details, but close to the correct length for each component. The model should feature  GW 2 bolt chairs and pointwork, and that's not goung to happen! As I posted before, the British finescale B7 kits are just too long for my plans, and the decision now is whether to use the nearish peco slip and crossing, or wait for the b6 range sometime down the line. Peco would do, and was what I expected to use when all this started.  Waiting for the B6s would allow  me to go 00sf in the most visible areas, but I can probably do without that.. For now I will get on with the train shed, and see if the  00sf b6 range  arrives in time.

Thanks

Dave

Curious about what was to come of what I had photographed , I did some investigation on the Camden planning portal. It seems that they will be constructing a berm along the bottom of the Park  Village East retaining wall. This will come out about 5 metres, and stand about 3 metres above the main line rail level. It will have a parapet at the railway side and butresses against  the existing retaining wall.  One cross section shows HS2 in a box, partially open, about another 5 metres from the berm.

All subject to change I guess.

Lots of pdfs to download on the Camden site.

Dave

I thought I'd go and see some of the works for myself today, and took a look at what was visible around Euston. There was quite a lot to see from Mornington Terrace, though I can only guess at the processes in use.  A few samples below, and many more at https://www.flickr.com/photos/unravelled/albums/72157699087675192/with/51877966313/

The Flickr album also includes some similar photos from two years ago

I hope these are of some interest

Dave

These are the remains of the oddest one I have seen, though abandoned by the time I saw it. I have a vague memory that there were bridges across the windows at one stage, and the track entered through the hole in the sash at the left. I assume that it just ran as a shuttle.

First floor above a shop on Denmark Hill, near Camberwell Green

Dave

My local train watching , later spotting, then photographing spot, was next to Walton Well Road bridge, Oxford North Junction, (before that got moved to Aristotle lane).

That's me  on the right. The structure is a bicycle sized kissing gate which was a good legal observation point, before we started trespassing closer to the lines.

Occasionally we went along the allotment path, alongside the shed, and up to the coaling stage and turntable.

Photos 1954 or '55.

I continued to take  photographs there past the end of Oxford steam, through the disposal of the locos there, and the last steam on the York Bournemouth and Bournemoth York services. Up until recently I visited the bridge to see the changes, especially while the Aristotle Lane works were under way.

Dave

In Brockley, London SE4, our deliveries are still being delayed, but starting to appear. This week I've had a hospital letter dated December 21, and a RM tracked 48 package posted on December 29th.

I fear there are large "last in first out" heaps of mail at the back of some delivery offices, slowly being worked through.

Dave

 Much later...

Progress on Wylde is sporadic. The first significant development relates to the design of   the factory backscene. I am imagining that Lucy's ironworks moved out of Oxford to Thame a lot earlier than they actually did.  They took over a site adjacent to the station and grew a rail served factory complex there. Possibly the rail provision was updated during the war?

So I'm supposing they had their own shunting loco, with basic shed and facilities. Incoming would be fuel for the foundry, (coal or coke?), paints,  timber for the pattern makers and for crates. Outgoing would be finished switchgear, crated or not. By the late 50s, lorries would be in use alongside a reduced rail service.
 

One of the consequences of a reduced rail activity, is that a fledgling preservation group has access to space on the system for a few locos saved from the breakers, (I am resisting many of the small locos which made it into industrial use, but not all).
 

I have come up with several  track plans of increasing complexity. The idea is that the foundry is off scene  to the left, (Oxford). On the loading unloading area there are separate bays   for inbound goods at the left and outbound at the right.

The upper left track will  disappear through a concealed opening  to extra loco storage off scene. It ends up linking in to the main circuit. The upper right track would ideally be part of a continuous run but I can't see an easy way of concealing this, so it may not feature in the final version. One of the reasons for wanting a continuous run through the factory was to provide a circuit in code 100, to allow older locos to be run, (the station will be in code 75 bullhead). The factory uses up a stock of small  radius points I have.

This area of the layout was finalised and glued down, with points operated by blue point units which will be operated from the front edge of the baseboard. At this stage, the right hand (London) end was left unconnected, while planning continued.

Laying the main station was waiting for the arrival of Peco bullhead slips. I had considered using flat bottom versions as placeholders, but soon abandoned that idea. Plans changed with the announcement of British Finescale pointwork kits. After waiting for their release, I bought a couple of kits to try. They were simple to build, and looked so much better. Unfortunately the first B7 releases are just too long for my layout. I will have to wait for the full range of B6 turnouts and crossings before I can proceed. I hope to be using  the 00sf versions.

Using one of the British finescale, and a couple of peco points, I have laid out and connected up a plain lined version of the station, so I have something to run trains . I was also  able to join the factory sidings to  the main circuit at the right hand end.

This is the view from the Oxford end, of the temporary plain lined track layout.

This is a rough idea what the final track layout will be, again from the  Oxford end.

And the reverse view.

The goods shed is a placeholder, it is one of several models I bought about 50 years ago, and which I later realised comes from Torpoint.

As well as the layout work, I have been working, on and off,  at drawing up plans for the trainshed and footbridge. I was given a good start on the train shed, thanks to David Bigcheeseplant, who had made drawings of the version at High Wycombe, seen in his recent thread. With his drawings, a few known measurements, and a lot of photos, I set about producing the drawings for Thame. These drawings have gone through many iterations, with steps retraced after wrong assumptions and poor interpretation of grainy photos.

I have also been trying out some 3d prints created from these drawings. This is the best so far, for a typical truss/column assembly. For construction they will be aligned with threaded rod through the holes in the bottom rail. The centre section can be broken out for the trackbed after assembly.

Thanks
 

Dave

The making of a railway, by LTC Rolt has a few small photos of platforms under construction. on the GC. It looks as if the wall is about 24" thick, (possibly 27" or 3 bricks). One photo shows that the inner part was made up of a series of arches, presumably to save weight and materials.

This picture, taken during reconstruction on a platform at Eastleigh still in use shows just a brick and a half wall, with the platform edge slabs centrally above. The fill seems hard packed, and it looks as if the gap behind the new brickwork is filled with concrete

At Micheldever, before  it was reinstated, the remains of the central platform looked to be nothing special. It looks as if the walls had been removed, the loose fill heaped up. and allowed to grow grass and weeds.

Dave

6 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Hi Guys,

 

Currently working in CAD for a 00 Gauge B7 crossover @ 50mm spacing (ready for an upcoming Hornby Magazine Article  )

 

It's difficult to cater for every single formation, but as Martin says, these are only kits!

 

 

This may be a silly idea, but by  adding one or two more long timbers on each half crossing, (and making  all the longer timbers overlength), would it be possble to make a crossing kit adaptable for different track spacings? That is assuming you aren't just about to add chairs to the extended timbers to fix the spacing...

Thanks

Dave

My father had one of these, which I managed to break when trying to cut something outside its capability. I later  bought a replacement I found in a junk shop. I have a stock of the metal strip, rod, and even some corrugated metal which I think was part of the range. All this is packed away somewhere, unless it has rusted away. I don't remember any accessories or documentation, but if I can dig it out I will have a look. I still use the soldering iron rest my father made. It must  date from the fifties as it has been about for as long as I remember.

Dave

Was this the one you found?  L&L catalogue HPL846 [3.4L] RECTANGULAR SIZE. 330×131×118mm

Listed, but  out of stock, by amazon uk, but might be available somewhere. Worth contacting l&l? 

Dave

I have used  some "lock and lock" brand containers which are slightly shorter than your requirements, ( about 295x50x75mm) but bigger ones may be available. Even if the length is the same the diagonal might give what you need.

Hth

Dave

As a wild guess at the internals, perhaps 3 generator sets, as there are 3 sets of louvres, and 3 (exhaust?) structures on the roof. The rest could be a fuel tank, and/or riding space.

The modelling question is whether to copy the sides as the pictures show, or assume both sides were plated between 1957 and 1964. I'm tempted to do mine as shown in the pictures for a bit of variety, even though the imbalance of windows and doors between  the pictures suggests to me that modification would have been done to both sides. Perhaps  it is in Swindon for replating and modification.

Dave

My best guess at the writing is: 

ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT

SHUNT WITH CARE

Dave

My photo of the other side was taken in 1964, in a parcels train at Oxford. I have an incomplete K's kit to construct it from, one day.

This makes 3 photos I've seen of it, there is another at http://www.penrhos.me.uk/LowRoofs2.shtml, (the same side as the OP,but not such good detail).

Dave

Any idea of the date of the photo in the OP?

On 17/05/2021 at 12:50, SamThomas said:

You could always use these (the prices vary depending on the stockist) ;

 

https://www.modeltech.uk/

Another thank you for alerting me to this product range, an order has been placed. I have just been reworking my lifting section, but it may well be done again when these arrive.

I  think I documented my original build in my Wylde thread (in sig), but I used the two part cabinet blocks, which have tapered mating faces, to provide some of the alignment.

Thanks

Dave

Not exactly televant here, but in other threads some painters have swapped paint heads between brands to good effect.

Dave

Yes, I should have said post WWI. Between that and the grouping, there must  have been a lot of incompatable terminology  in use across the industry which needed standardisation. I wonder which committee or group coined the term common crossing?

Dave