DavidLong

16 hours ago, Timmy84 said:

no code 40 track though Dave! I am watching with interest...

 

thanks as ever for the encouragement.

And don't you hold back on the Code 40, Tim. The rest of your modelling deserves it!

David

Are the coaches in the infamous 'Stratford Brown'? What paint did you use to reproduce it?

Really enjoying this layout's development.

David

On 08/11/2020 at 13:25, Ian Smeeton said:

I have been eyeing up a small stash of Stephen Harris Dia 1/108 16t Mineral kits, reading & re-reading the instructions.

 

Just about to put an order in to Shop 2 for the required bits to finish them before I start the build.

 

However, the only reference to buffers that I can see, is 'Buffers to choice'.

 

Having checked the Shop 2 listing, and the Barrowmore site for ideas, I see from the Diagram book that heads should be 1'1" diameter.

 

The only ones that I can see at that size is 2-072 or 2-078. Are these correct, or should I substitute something else?

 

Regards

 

Ian

Ian,

Andy has pretty much answered this for your purposes but I'll just add a few comments.

For all unfitted 16T mineral wagons 2-070 is the type to go for. Some were fitted with a 2-rib version but it was never widespread enough for it to be worthwhile producing the 2mm equivalent. In theory the wagons that had 4-shoe brakes and were vac fitted should have had 20.5" buffers (2-076) but, as far as I can see, this wasn't necessarily the case and you could stick with 2-070. These wagons were a bit of a minority until the rebodying programme increased their numbers.

The real variety is in the 8-shoe fitted variants and here you could use any of 2-078, 2-081 or 2-084. These look quite remarkable on such a short wagon; the latter two types adding 25% to the length of the vehicle!

Having spent more years than I care to remember on the wagon buffer project it does slightly wind me up that we sell the starter mineral wagon kit with the wrong buffers but I guess it comes down to economics and ease of production. Oh well, ho hum . . .

David

11 hours ago, beast66606 said:

 

Not Stockport, thats a LYR box, Newton Heath area perhaps ?

45632 was a Newton Heath engine for the last couple of months before withdrawal in October 1965. Looking at maps I think that the signal box in the background is Dean Lane and the platform fencing is Newton Heath station. The engine is standing on one of the tracks which were on a lower level behind the platform. The photo looks like it was taken after withdrawal as the smokebox number plate and name plate have been removed.

Manchester Victoria was a colour light area so I assume that Dean Lane would be a fringe box to the Victoria area.

David 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/20/former-tree-of-the-year-felled-in-warwickshire-to-make-way-for-hs2

I've been a Guardian reader for over fifty five years but most of their coverage of HS2 makes me despair.

David

Photo of 69001 (56031) on Page 14 in the latest issue of Rail magazine. Looks a bit more civilized now it is back on its bogies!

David

Edit: Just noticed that it is the same photo as posted on Monday by Talltim. Unsurprisingly the photo is by Richard Clinnick who works for Rail!

19 hours ago, Geordie Exile said:

 

I see what you mean, and the white paint highlighted every tiny blob of solder and associated modelling mank that I hadn't cleared off.  As they're such a complicated arrangement, I stuck with the etch - it was already testing my skills just to complete the model.  I've added grab rails to the ends of the wooden hoppers in 0.3mm ns wire, as they were a simple extended U-shape.  To make them more robust they're drilled through and superglued in.  I bottled adding any more (the sides should have two each according to the Dave Bartlett photos I've been able to find) but I wasn't sure I could produce 16 of such uniformity that they would add to the look rather than detract from it.  In hindsight, a simple jig would probably have done it - and still might - but I think producing a jig for the 21T is still beyond my skill level.

 

Thanks for the suggestion, and I've some more 21T ordered so I might give it a go.  The worst that could happen is that I go back to the etched piece when my attempts go to pot.  And a final thought - I don't think I've found a photo of the 21T where the handrails aren't bent to b*ggery anyway, so there's my prototype!

 

Richard

Hi Richard,

What you need is a N Brass handrail jig:

https://www.nbrasslocos.co.uk/kitimages/fitbr/n23284handrailjigweb.gif

David

On 10/10/2020 at 21:15, Geordie Exile said:

Well, I've done it. Our very nice Moderator has moved this thread into the 2mm FS forum.  When I first had a poke around the forum, I felt like a school kid sneaking into the staff room, except the grown-ups have been very welcoming rather than hurling blackboard rubbers at the cheeky wee interloper.

 

To celebrate, here's a photo of my first completed wagon, a 21t hopper from Bob Jones' stable.  (The mineral wagon taster kit doesn't count, as that was practising!)  I've four wooden-bodied hoppers in the paint shop, with the rattle-can red oxide still drying, but they're not complete until I figure out how to get the Fox Transfers lettering onto them.  From what I can see, many of the metal hoppers such as this one weren't badged as NCB, so this one's done.

 

 

I think I'll invest in some blackener, as the DGs aren't quite as loose now they're covered in paint, however lightly I tried to spray it.  Every day's a school day.

 

Richard

Hi Richard,

Some nice work on the 21T hopper but I have a small recommendation. For handrails it would be worth trying 0.2mm nickel silver wire as, even when the paint is thinly applied, it always contrives to make the handrails appear much thicker.

The Albion Alloys product is excellent as it is straight and, being nickel, it solders well. In a shameless plug for my 2mm colleague Ed Sissling it can be found here:

https://www.acsissling.com/?i=332639&f=332647

David

I think that the yellow lines on the earlier post nicely demonstrate the problem. I suspected it on the first overhead view but the lines reinforce the point. The straight part of the upper wing rail isn't aligned with the nose of the crossing vee so that the front wheels of the loco are trying to pull the loco to the right but the movement is partly compensated for by the check rail but not completely so the wheels then hit the nose. Small four wheel wagons seem to be quite forgiving in these situations, someone with more knowledge may be able to explain why this is so. The small jig that I demonstrated earlier in another thread prevents this happening by way of both the crossing and the wing rail being clipped to the central straight edge while being soldered to the base plates. Both of my resultant crossing assemblies worked first time.

My own particular achilles heel (or toe in the case!) is at the switch ends which I seem to get right most of the time but usually it seems by pure luck rather than any engineering precision on my part!

David

There is also a handrail jig available from N Brass:

https://www.nbrasslocos.co.uk/kitimages/fitbr/n23284handrailjigweb.gif

David

I think that they are from a batch of Dogfish wagons built for Southern Region that have longer side chutes that enable discharge clear of the third rail.

David

On 21/09/2020 at 12:26, Phil Traxson said:

I beg to differ on the comment. The closest to 0-16.5 is actually the the Glyn Valley tramway, which was 2ft 4.5 ins closely followed by the Snailbeach District Railway at 2ft 4 ins both within a couple of tenths of a mm of 16.5mm at 7mm/1ft scale, both of which were definitely in the real world.  Just read more of the thread and found I'd been beaten to this.

The GVT could be modelled in 4mm scale using 2FS components. At 1:76.2 using 9.42mm gauge equates to 28.26 inches. Not too far out I would suggest and also pretty close to the Snailbeach. And, yes, as a longtime 2mm Association member I have considered it . . .

David

6 hours ago, justin1985 said:

 

Ingenious - great work David! What were the dimensions you arrived at for the jig in 2mm?

 

What are your non ply sleepers made from? Looks like ply or maybe even card, rather than plastic strip?

 

J

The jig is made from two pieces of 15mm x 15mm pine strip of the sort available at DIY sheds. These sandwich a piece of ply which, as with all ply is a nominal size, in this case 0.5mm but is actually closer to 0.45mm. Interestingly the flangeway still works out ok and none of my locos or stock has any trouble with it.

I should add that the square pieces of card at the ends are to keep the rails level when adding the nickel cross pieces.

The sleepers are all ply or pcb. The pcb sleepers are from the Association and the ply versions are some that I had produced privately both as plain track sleepers and crossing timbers. I used to produce my own but decided that laser cutting was the better way. I could produce reasonable quality 2mm wide timbers for points but trying to produce conisistent 1.7mm wide plain sleepers was a bit of a nightmare. We did have some trouble with finding a nominal 0.8mm ply due to the usual variations of thin ply and the sleepers are about 0.9mm thick which has meant that the pcb timbers are boosted with thin paper attached to the underside.

David

And there is another way. On this very forum there is a useful area concerning 'Handbuilt track and Templot'. Now most of the discussion is for scales other than 2mm but then through most of my modelling life I have picked up most of my information from scales other than 2mm!

If you follow this link:

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/156112-simple-to-use-common-crossing-jig/

you will find a description of a jig from the EM Gauge Society and how to use it. If you then page down to an entry for July 1st you will see my version of the same jig but scaled down for 2FS.

If you then move on to page 3 of the thread you can see how I made use of it. Entry date is September 10th.

I do note that for filing and assembly of the vee I used the Association 1:6 jig. However, I have never been able to get on with the crossing assembly jig. Working upside down (!) always confused me, the strips across the underside of the rails never ended up in the right place and the distance from the nose of the vee to the knuckle never seemed to be the same as that on the Templot plan that I was using and invariably seemed to be too large. It may be my incompetence but it just didn't work for me. The EMGS jig design worked perfectly and the two points that I built worked with no further adjustment needed.

David

16 hours ago, montyburns56 said:

Diss 1976

 

 

 

 

I am a bit puzzled by the point operation at Diss. The point in the foreground which gives access to the main line is hand operated. The point off the main line and the trap in the loop and the one in the loop siding must all be under the control of the signaller so why is there a hand operated point in the middle of them?

David

Remarkable Pete that the heading photo of Dungeness could double up as the windswept wilderness that is the Isle of Grain. Once seen, never forgotten!

David

I've found the BY at several retailers in the last couple of days as I'll probably be ordering one. Here's an example:

https://www.hattons.co.uk/197002/dapol_2p_012_504_maunsell_brake_van_s766s_in_br_southern_region_green/stockdetail.aspx

I better get the order in or they'll all be gone!

David

Back on July 1st I showed a photo of a hand-made version of the EMGS crossing jig which was to be used for making crossings in 2FS. As a refresher, here's a picture of the jig:

I finally got around to using it last month so I thought that I would show how I got on. Firstly I'll show a photo of the 2mm Scale Associations jig by which the filing of the rails for the vee and its subsequent assembly are accomplished:

This is a 1:6 but other angles are available. The next photo shows the jig being used to add the second wing rail (I forgot to take a shot of the first one!):

Then a couple of photos of the crossing assembly in place on the turnout:

Finally one of the finished turnout:

All in all in what a very successful exercise and I shall continue to make use of the jig. The only mistake that I made was that when it came to soldering the assembly in place on the pcb timbers for the first couple of joints I used a slightly too large diameter of solder ball. This resulted in a larger joint than was required to get the half chair near to the rail. I did manage to file the joints back but they are still a little distant. Later joints were done more successfully with a smaller diameter of solder ball.

As an aside I'll show the method of operation of the points using an idea from Megapoints. The mounting of the servo is the same but, sadly for their sales, I use hacked servos from which all the wiring, save those to the motor, has been removed. Operation is by a single AA battery via a DPDT bias switch and crossing polarity change is by frog juicer.

Many thanks for drawing the jig to my attention, John, as I hadn't noticed it in the EMGS lists but I shall certainly be making use of my version in future.

David

10 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Yes, that boxcar has become a rather 'elevated' gate guardian.

Edited later: In fact, I was last in Victoria in 2018, so this must have been taken BEFORE Jim49's view, so I guess the boxcar has been removed from it's elevated location.?

At some point between 2018 and 2019 it must have been moved as I photographed it in exactly the same place as Jim found it.

Arriving just-too-late, as I obviously have in the case of rail action on the Island, always takes me back to August 1967. Our holiday to the south meant that it was two weeks after the end of Southern steam and I had to make do with all the 'dead' locos that were stored in Salisbury shed. Just to compound the situation, Boots lost the films that I took in for processing after the holiday! The first 'live' Southern Pacific that I saw was at the Bluebell around a decade later.

I am enjoying these photos of how it used to be on Vancouver Island and they are all much appreciated.

David

Does anyone know if 1D34 09.53 Manchester Piccadilly to Holyhead is still loco-hauled? RTT always shows the pathing as 158/168/170/175 but unless there is a problem it is usually Class 67 + hauled stock. I did wonder if, due to pandemic timetable changes, there may be enough units to operate this and associated diagrams. Unsurprisingly, I haven't been in North Wales much this year as, for much of it, I wasn't allowed in the country!

David

Chris mentioned in an earlier post that he had walked out from Victoria to the E & N yard at Victoria West and I did the same in May 2019. The bridge across the harbour which took the track into the city has now been replaced:

The closest that the track now gets to the new bridge is a few hundred yards west at this bridge across Harbour Road:

The track is complete from there onwards to the yard. This is a view looking west about half way between the above bridge and the yard:

On entering the yard the main structure on view is the roundhouse:

And some views of the yard itself. Firstly a view looking west across the turntable:

Then looking east towards the city and those brooding condos. The exit towards the city is to the right between the pile of shale and the blue sign:

Finally another view looking west:

The poor old Esquimalt & Nanaimo seems to be, from what I have read,  a bit of a football that is kicked around between those who would like the line to be revived and those who would like it to be converted into a walking/cycling route. I suspect that there is a bigger element that is casting eyes on this incongruous scene and seeing it covered in yet more condos with the profits from the sale of the yard going towards the walking/cycling route. To British eyes the scene brings to mind such sights from the 1960s/early '70s when closed stations and yards were often left to rot for a few years until the scrappers moved in, followed by the builders of another 'Beeching Close', 'Stephenson Way' or 'Old Station Close'! 

David

On 28/08/2020 at 10:07, AY Mod said:

Capacity has been increased but there's still an issue with it determining upload paths.

 

 

 

 

Hi Andy,

I don't know if this is the same issue. I uploaded two photos to a post and went to add a third but I had exceeded the 10mb limit.

I deleted the second photo and decided to add a different one but the system told me that I had still exceeded the 10mb limit.

I concluded that post at that point and started another one to use the two missing photos but when I went to add the first I got the 10mb warning again! At that point I gave up . . .

David

Thanks for the photos, Chris. A shame that I missed the E & N when it was still active, I would love to have bumbled north on the railcar. What a treat that it ran behind your late sister's garden!

The Alberni Pacific hasn't run this year, apparently due to 'budget and equipment concerns' but their Facebook page does show that there is activity going on for maintenance. I was in Port Alberni on 21st May 2018, the day of my 57th birthday, but sadly it was not an operating day. Here's a photo that I took of the depot at Port Alberni:

David

Photos such as this remind me of why I love BC. We should have been back on Vancouver Island this month but a certain virus has knocked that on the head and now we have to wait until next May. Nine hours on Air Transat from Manchester to Vancouver is just about bearable when I know what is at the other end.

David

I still don't understand why they didn't simply redesignate third class as second class. If you have a nomenclature which uses 'first' then, by definition, the remaining alternative must be 'second'. This is similar to the marketing guff which describes modern second class as 'standard' whilst still retaining 'first'. A DTS will always be Driving Trailer Second to me!

Chiltern Railways don't have any first class but do have the 'Business Zone' which can be used on payment of a supplement to a normal standard class ticket which does keep some alignment in the nomenclature. Business/Standard fine but First/Standard, it ain't right I tell you!

David