Fryers Lane

A forum for participants in the Standard Gauge Workbench.
Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:14 am

I've been a member of the society for a couple of years now, but this is my first post on the forum. Some of you may already know me from my posts on RMweb and in particular my involvement with the Black Country Blues project layout on there (and in BRM). While BCB and my own current layout (Foundry Lane) had been built to EM standards I've had a desire to go P4 for a few years now and have been (slowly) working on a project to model Wolverhampton Low Level in its final form as a parcels depot (see blog entries here: http://foundrylane.wordpress.com/catego ... low-level/ ).

However, while I've been working on buildings and rolling stock for WLL, I don't currently have the space to put up the baseboards. Fryers Lane is my attempt to build something simple that can perform as a test track for stock I'm building for WLL or as a layout in it's own right - indulging in a long held want to make use of some more modern air braked stock than I've used previously.

The concept for the layout is (loosely) based on Bloxwich on the Walsall - Rugeley line; although I've taken the liberty of singling the through line.
trackpad_screenshot_2013_11_11_2148_20.png

It will use a single baseboard (measuring 1435 x 450 mm), eventually with a fiddleyard at either end to allow through running. Current state of play is that the basebaord is built and a track bed has been fixed in position. I'm hoping to make a start on track construction in the next few weeks as time allows.
WP_20131201_008.jpg

DSCF3537_1.jpg

shipbadger
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:00 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby shipbadger » Sat Dec 28, 2013 2:06 pm

Mark,

Thanks for the link back to your blog I've just spent time reminiscing about Wolverhampton LL as I knew it in the early 70's. I only paid one 'official' visit and that was to collect my push bike. It had been despatched from Euston by my father as an unaccompanied parcel in the guards van and should have turned up at Wolverhapton HL. After days of enquiries the poor chap behind the counter suggested I go down to LL as see if it had turned up there; it had. Goodness only knows where else it had been. Reminds me of another contemporary who wanted his bike sent from Woking to Bournemouth, the clerk enquired if he wanted it sent via the S&D!

Tony Comber

User avatar
Flymo748
Forum Team
Posts: 2415
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:00 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Flymo748 » Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:26 am

Mark Forrest wrote:I've been a member of the society for a couple of years now, but this is my first post on the forum. Some of you may already know me from my posts on RMweb and in particular my involvement with the Black Country Blues project layout on there (and in BRM). While BCB and my own current layout (Foundry Lane) had been built to EM standards I've had a desire to go P4 for a few years now and have been (slowly) working on a project to model Wolverhampton Low Level in its final form as a parcels depot (see blog entries here: http://foundrylane.wordpress.com/catego ... low-level/ ).

Welcome Mark, to the Society Forum.

I'd picked up your thread on RMWeb through the Black Country link, having been born and bred (or "dragged up" as we call it...) there. The Wordpress blog is now bookmarked as well.

All the very best with your SGW layout, and having seen your past work I'm sure that we'll soon be impressed with progress.

Cheers
Flymo
Beware of Trains - occasional modelling in progress!
www.5522models.co.uk

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:41 pm

Thanks both. Hopefully I won't keep you waiting too long before I have some progress updates on the SGW layout and WLL; that blog is long overdue an update too!

Cheers

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:00 pm

Since my last post on here I've decided on a building for the rear corner of the layout (a pub - based on the Hatherton Arms in Bloxwich) and have made a start on track laying.

WP_20140323_022.jpg

WP_20140330_001.jpg

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:22 pm

Making slow but steady progress with track laying on this little project. My visit to Wakefield on Saturday has inspired me and gave me chance to stock up on supplies which I needed.

WP_20140408_005.jpg

WP_20140413_019.jpg


Also added my first P4 loco to the fleet:
WP_20140408_035.jpg

User avatar
Colin Parks
Posts: 596
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Colin Parks » Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:59 pm

Hi mark,

I have been following your progress on this layout on RMweb. It is all looking very nice and the use of that wagon for track construction parts is rather amusing!

All the best,

Colin

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Sat Sep 20, 2014 7:16 pm

I've not been too good at keeping this thread updated, although have been making slow progress with the layout.
Significant step forwards today through as I've made and soldered the crossing vees for the tandem turnout:
15298937325_0d24d4d535_o.jpg


15275915586_74e75881de_o.jpg


A couple of other photos taken since my last update:
DSCF3541.jpg


DSCF3544.jpg

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:40 pm

I've recently bought some switch rails which when they arrived are rusty. Would others who have used steel rail before (I haven't) advise cleaning them up and using them or returning them to the supplier?

Terry Bendall
Forum Team
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:46 am

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Terry Bendall » Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:02 am

Mark Forrest wrote:I've recently bought some switch rails which when they arrived are rusty. Would others who have used steel rail before (I haven't) advise cleaning them up and using them or returning them to the supplier?


This probably depends on how you feel. They should not be supplied in a rusty condition. The supplier should replace then. On the other hand if you are in a hurry to make use of them, clean off the rust and they should be OK to use. Then have a grumble to the supplier. :)

Terry Bendall

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:04 pm

Thanks Terry, think I'll get them replaced. Irony is that I bought them to save a bit of time instead if filing some myself, that'll teach me! Meanwhile I've got a couple of wagon kits to play with and a DMU to rewheel

User avatar
Colin Parks
Posts: 596
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Colin Parks » Sun Oct 05, 2014 10:58 am

Nice work on the tandem point Mark.

Getting two common crossings lined up as one assembly is quite an achievement (to me!). I have one query: Some of the crossing timbers under the crossings seem to be shifted on the Templot template, as though there are two sleepers instead of three. I have little understanding of these matters, so was the change in sleepers pitch in order to support the crossings in a better way?

All the best,

Colin

User avatar
Martin Wynne
Posts: 896
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Martin Wynne » Sun Oct 05, 2014 1:31 pm

Colin Parks wrote:I have one query: Some of the crossing timbers under the crossings seem to be shifted on the Templot template, as though there are two sleepers instead of three. I have little understanding of these matters, so was the change in sleepers pitch in order to support the crossings in a better way?

Hi Colin,

Can you post the templates in question?

If you mean the position of the closed-up timbers at the wing rail front rail-joints, these are incorrectly shown on Scalefour/Exactoscale templates for most REA crossings. There was a long discussion about this on the forums about 5 years ago. Here is a link:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic. ... 88#p705988

regards,

Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. And counting ...

User avatar
martinm
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby martinm » Sun Oct 05, 2014 2:15 pm

Hi there,
I think that the crossing timbers have been changed because the common crossing has crept to the right of its intended position.
This may be a result of the way in which the template was prepared, looking at the other images it is not clear that this crossing nose is defined by the template.
regards,
martin
Attachments
Clipboard01.jpg

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:01 pm

Colin Parks wrote:Nice work on the tandem point Mark.

Getting two common crossings lined up as one assembly is quite an achievement (to me!). I have one query: Some of the crossing timbers under the crossings seem to be shifted on the Templot template, as though there are two sleepers instead of three. I have little understanding of these matters, so was the change in sleepers pitch in order to support the crossings in a better way?

All the best,

Colin


Thanks Colin. I don't mind admitting that my first attempt at making the crossings ended up in the bin, but this second attempt seems to be ok (if a little rough around the edges).

I think what you are seeing with the timbers is the result of me rushing into getting some track down before I'd completed all of the "sleeper shoving" in Templot! When I came to position the crossings assembly I realised I didn't have a timber under the nose of one of the crossings, so had move a few timbers around to rectify this.

Below is what I ended up with, although I'm not entirely sure it is 100% prototypical.

15444684921_09f75a00b1_o.jpg

User avatar
Colin Parks
Posts: 596
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Colin Parks » Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:30 pm

Hi Mark,

I suppose there is a rule of thumb to keep the point rail of the vee supported on a sleeper. I have not attempted any complex formations like you have as yet, (but there is something similar in the pipeline). How are you going to operate the point blades? With stretcher bars or something else under the base board?

All the best,

Colin

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Sun Oct 05, 2014 4:28 pm

Colin Parks wrote:Hi Mark,

I suppose there is a rule of thumb to keep the point rail of the vee supported on a sleeper. I have not attempted any complex formations like you have as yet, (but there is something similar in the pipeline). How are you going to operate the point blades? With stretcher bars or something else under the base board?

All the best,

Colin

My understanding is that the nose of the vee is usually supported by a timber.
Current thinking is that I'll use Exactoscale tortoise adapters with servos mounted on MERG mounts to operate the point blades. I'd like to add cosmetic tie bars (along with a facing point lock on the main line); I have a couple of the Ambis tie bars stashed away for a rainy day when I'm feeling brave with the soldering iron.
Image20140923_225441 by Mark A Forrest, on Flickr

User avatar
Martin Wynne
Posts: 896
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Martin Wynne » Sun Oct 05, 2014 5:17 pm

Colin Parks wrote:I suppose there is a rule of thumb to keep the point rail of the vee supported on a sleeper.

Hi Colin,

It's rather more than a rule of thumb, at least for bullhead track. It is essential that the vee nose and its enclosing "A" chair is supported on a timber. The position of the blunt nose relative to the centre-line of the "A" timber is specified in the REA designs:

Image

Generally when working with partial templates in Templot you should keep the timbering for each crossing on the same template as the vee nose, so that the timbering under the crossing is correctly spaced. Here you can see the timbering of each crossing is on the corresponding template:

Image

(That is actually a 3-throw turnout, but the principle is the same for tandem turnouts.)

This is a closer view showing a tandem being worked on. The brown timbering on the middle crossing template will be used, and the underlying timbering on the other templates removed:

Image

regards,

Martin.
40+ years developing Templot. And counting ...

User avatar
Colin Parks
Posts: 596
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Colin Parks » Sun Oct 05, 2014 8:28 pm

Thanks for such a detailed reply to my rather vague comments Martin.

Martin Wynne wrote:
Colin Parks wrote:I have one query: Some of the crossing timbers under the crossings seem to be shifted on the Templot template, as though there are two sleepers instead of three. I have little understanding of these matters, so was the change in sleepers pitch in order to support the crossings in a better way?

Hi Colin,

Can you post the templates in question?

If you mean the position of the closed-up timbers at the wing rail front rail-joints, these are incorrectly shown on Scalefour/Exactoscale templates for most REA crossings. There was a long discussion about this on the forums about 5 years ago. Here is a link:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic. ... 88#p705988

regards,

Martin.


Er, I think Martinm and Mark explain it all in the post just after yours Martin!

All the best,

Colin

User avatar
Colin Parks
Posts: 596
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Colin Parks » Sun Oct 05, 2014 8:33 pm

Mark Forrest wrote:
Colin Parks wrote:Hi Mark,

I suppose there is a rule of thumb to keep the point rail of the vee supported on a sleeper. I have not attempted any complex formations like you have as yet, (but there is something similar in the pipeline). How are you going to operate the point blades? With stretcher bars or something else under the base board?

All the best,

Colin

My understanding is that the nose of the vee is usually supported by a timber.
Current thinking is that I'll use Exactoscale tortoise adapters with servos mounted on MERG mounts to operate the point blades. I'd like to add cosmetic tie bars (along with a facing point lock on the main line); I have a couple of the Ambis tie bars stashed away for a rainy day when I'm feeling brave with the soldering iron.
Image20140923_225441 by Mark A Forrest, on Flickr


Hi Mark,

That does look like a very good set up for the point blade actuation. I also have some Ambis parts for the tie bars on my point, although in that case they will be functional - gulp!

All the best,

Colin

Phil O
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 5:23 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Phil O » Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:10 pm

Hi Mark

Can you please give the MERG part number for the servo mount please.

Thanks

Phil

User avatar
martinm
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby martinm » Tue Oct 07, 2014 4:01 pm

Phil,
The original Point Motor – Micro-Servo Mount, Kit 675, seems to have been repaced by Kit 681 and the conversion to horizontal operation is Kit 682. This last seems intended to replace theTortoise adaptor seen above.
I'm not quite sure how these could be used under the baseboard though.
regards,
martin

Mark Forrest
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Mark Forrest » Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:27 pm

Phil O wrote:Hi Mark

Can you please give the MERG part number for the servo mount please.

Thanks

Phil


It says kit 671 on the packaging, although (as Martin says) I gather these have now been superseded by a different design.

Phil O
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 5:23 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Phil O » Wed Oct 08, 2014 7:12 am

Thanks very much, chaps.

Phil

User avatar
Serjt-Dave
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:31 pm

Re: Fryers Lane

Postby Serjt-Dave » Wed Oct 08, 2014 2:36 pm

The new MERG servo mounts are 3D printed and in my mind not as nice as the old ones.

Dave


Return to “Standard Gauge Workbench”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests