Bloodnok

Aaaaand ... it now works right through to JMRI. I have a configured panel, I can set junctions and routes, and the first train detector is working -- the block goes red in JMRI when a train is on the track. Well, modulo one dodgy joint I apparently completely forgot to solder. But I've fixed that now.

... Concept proven. Serial production can now commence.

It's alive!
 

Okay, my first train didn't go far, but I've only got one block wired up so far. I want to confirm I can actually read the train detector before doing much more...

I wanted to upload some video of things like point motors moving, and that required creating a YouTube channel. Which required a name. Which kinda forced me to actually make a decision.

I put a first video there which is mostly a slideshow of what's been posted in this thread with a few extra / different shots here and there:
 

... Actual video content (of things which move!) coming soon.

Lessons learned today: Check points for electrical conductivity *before* laying them.

I have spent quite a while today trying to work out what was wrong with my wiring where the frog of one point was not reliably powered. Solution: One of the three rails that make up the frog was not connected to the other two. So if I tried testing connectivity on that rail, it would always fail. Hence failing about 1/3rd of the time, and not with any correlation to which way the junction was set.

Wow, did I ever forget to keep this updated

Oops.

Outside of the overtime I'm doing for work (which is why I've not been on here so much), I finished laying the storage yard track and I'm now wiring up the bottom level of the layout.

I have the electronics mounted in four of the concentration points. There will be more of these later when the upper levels are more complete. The servo controllers are all built, as is the DCC command station and booster. The canbus data cabling is in, but I'm now waiting for some reels of heavier gauge wire to arrive before I complete the power distribution and DCC block wiring.

11 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

The class 56 was a Brush design, in fact a 47 with an up rated class 50 engine. Brush did not have the physical capacity to build them, hence Romania and Doncaster, so does it count as a Doncaster design?

... And this had me scurrying back through the thread to find if "design" or "build" (or either ... or both) was specified for the Doncaster poll. We've had various options specified previously. This time, it just seems to have been "Doncaster", with no obvious definition.

So I await a ruling.

If the 56 is ruled out, then I suppose that would leave me voting for the 58. A loco which was a very unusual design for the UK, and one not to be repeated. It was half-aimed at the export market, a market on which it attracted precisely zero orders. At home it was notoriously slippery (not a good thing in a freight loco), and was ultimately outlived by the earlier and more numerous Class 56s. Although to be fair, the 56 inspired the creation and purchase of the class 59 by it's own sheer unreliability at one point, so it's not like they didn't have their own faults...

Class 85 for passenger, and Class 56 for freight.

On 25/06/2020 at 15:33, big jim said:

ive really struggled to find any current RTR tanks hence why I went for the Personel carrier, certainly looks more realistic than a train of Sherman tanks behind a 66! 

Modern tanks don't fit in the loading gauge anyway. They are too wide.

... Unless you are modelling the channel tunnel.

12 hours ago, great northern said:

North British Locomotive Company, worldwide.

... Oh, but there are so many.

The SAR Class 24, Class 25, and 4E, and the NZR J class get "honourable mentions".

But the real prize needs to go to ... errr .. either the SAR GMAM, or the Victorian R class. No, I can't decide between them, they are both epic in their own way.

And if we don't get tomorrow's poll, for their worst flop, I'll answer it early. Class 41.

Crewe?

No contest.

Class 87s. The original batch, not the later build 87/2s which got released with '90' scrawled on the side of them.

(I mean, this is a locomotive poll, which kinda rules out HST power cars. With these included, there would have been something to think about...)

2 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

I am sure the low number of people voting in the Derby loco contest were unable to chose which master piece of engineering beauty they were going to vote for and were still making up their minds when the vote closed.

I definitely got distracted by derbysulzers.com and completely failed to pick anything in time...

Yesterday I built two more servo controllers. They have been power-tested and are awaiting installation and configuration:

This DCC booster kit is at the 'initial low-current testing' phase where I make sure the relevant sockets are receiving the right power voltages before I finish construction:

I built it in the 5A configuration.

I got stuck with this relay driver, as one of the capacitors is missing from the bag of parts:



I need to source a replacement C7.

Once complete, I'll be using this to drive relay controlled ABC braking sections.



Oh, and I have to call this out, too. Take a bow, Rails of Sheffield. You have outdone even Amazon in the wasteful packaging challenge.

You managed to send me a couple of packets of insulating rail joiners, which would happily fit in an envelope ... in a box large enough for a large OO gauge locomotive.

"I'll be mostly building electronics".

<Cue the kazoo music>

... Amount of electronics built: Zero.

That should change now, as I've used the last insulating rail joiner. Well, unless I find the one that went 'ping'...

12 more servos have arrived, and I have now built enough point motors to get me as far as the visible surface of the layout.
 didn't actually order 12 servos though, I ordered 30. I've asked the vendor where the other 18 got to. They have promised to actually ship them this time...

I'm expecting a couple more servo controllers soon(tm).

The next 'pinch point' in construction is that I'm running out of insulating rail joiners. I have a grand total of 7 left (I'm not counting the one that went 'ping' -- the chances of actually finding that one are minimal). Apparently I've got through all the packets I bought, while ending up with more unopened packets of metal ones than I started out with. There must have been some spare packets lurking somewhere. Shame there wasn't any of the plastic ones lurking spare really. (Or maybe there were, and I've used those too?).

While those are on order, I'll be mostly building electronics. I have a DCC booster to build, plus some asymmetric braking sections (and their controller) to build. I've also been told I should have done my block detectors differently, so I'll need to modify those.

After a lot of cleaning up and moving stuff about, the underlay is complete at this end of the layout:



And the two-to-three track junction in the gradient (which is one end of the reversing section) has been located and is gluing:



(... now covered in weights).

I need more servos to arrive before I can mount point motors on these points.

I also finished the track circuit detectors, but then discovered the cable I was intending to use to connect them to the layout bus has a blind pin in the socket. I needed a 10 pin cable, and this one only had 9 of it's 10 wires connected, and the tenth doesn't even have the hole in the plug, so it won't even connect the other 9.

I've ordered new cables, although the delivery estimate is early July to mid August -- doesn't fill me with confidence.

A fairly productive day yesterday. The 6th and final yard track is installed and complete:
 

All the point motors have been built and installed at the yard exit:
 

The baseboard for the horseshoe into the gradient has been finished and has underlay on it:

... and I started building the first 8 block detectors. 

All the sectorisation liveries seemed to work quite well, but I'm going to have to second Clive's recommendation for NSE - this was a particularly bold departure from corporate blue, and sat well on a lot of different trains. I just about remember it's initial introduction, and the transformation of the railways that occurred with it form part of my early Railway memories.

If I can call out a second livery, it'd be LoadHaul -- despite at first glance looking like a really odd livery with all the angled lines, it ended up suiting just about everything it was applied to, no matter what the shape.

6 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

Can’t imagine getting away with that in MY study..

It certainly makes for an ... interesting backdrop ... when I'm in a virtual meeting. 

All six tracks glued at the yard exit, and point motors fitted:

And five tracks complete through to the yard to the entrance:

Time to get that sixth and final yard track installed...

No more photos yet but track #5 is gluing, more underlay has arrived, and I've now got enough point motor kits for both ends of the yards. Still waiting on another controller for the north end. It has been ordered.

I am hoping for some good weather this weekend so I can finish sanding the replacement board piece and complete the baseboard at the far end of the layout.

2 hours ago, great northern said:

Oh, bu****, I've just lost 2p.

Were you betting on black with a silver roof, a silver band along the middle, and large silver numbers / letters by any chance?

19 hours ago, FarrMan said:

There are plenty of classes of loco, steam, diesel and electric, that it would be nice to have preserved. Some of the very early locos, or the heyday of the broad gauge, and many others would be nice to see the originals still, especially in working order. I think my vote must go to the leader class from Bulleid. An interesting idea that, with more development, could have been successful. As it was, it appears to have hardly been given a chance.

I recall reading somewhere the original wartime plan for it was to have been oil fired. When they found out how much the (imported American) oil would actually cost, everything immediately reverted to coal firing. If at that point they had specified a mechanical stoker, the project could have been much more successful.

Even then, it's really just a strange looking, shortened Garratt. I wonder what Beyer, Peacock & Company would have designed if asked to make something about that long and with six driven axles?

More gluing of track has been achieved. I now have four yard tracks complete:

Train for scale:

Loops #1, #2 and #4 are able to park a loco+9 consist. Loop #3 will hold loco+10. Future loops #5 and #6 are going to be loco+9 and loco+10 respectively. This is more than will fit in the terminus station, which has been designed to host loco+7, or 8 car multiple unit sets. This extra space will allow me to run longer trains around the continuous run when I want to.

All loops have been divided up electrically so I can detect multiple shorter trains on track circuits and to apply ABC braking. This will allow me to dual or triple park shorter trains in the loops automatically.

23 hours ago, CameronL said:

To use these languages as the basis of place names you don't need a good imagination - you need an absolute lack of it. For instance, "Liverpool" is OE for "muddy creek" and "Manchester" possibly means "place of the river goddess where a Roman fort used to be". All English place names ending in "Chester" or "Cester" probably had a Roman fort there (so "Chester" is a particularly unimaginative one).

So ... much like every small town has a 'London road' in it -- because when someone came around and asked the local "What's that road called?", they knew that road as the one you take if you are going to/from London?

Laying mostly-straight track is a lot easier than tight curves -- the track doesn't want to move about anywhere near as much while it's gluing, so I can get more done in parallel.

The first yard track is now complete between the entrance and exit junctions. Capacity Loco+8 comfortably (or two shorter multiple unit trains):