First point. Early conundrums.

[RichardS]

It's a bit chicken and egg really. Do you make track first or some rolling stock which you might be able to test or run on another friendly modellers layout. I opted for the latter (more exciting) but of course once that's done you need your own track as well for continued testing and fettling. And boy does my first effort need that tlc!

So I have resolved to make a test track which must include a point, ergo I have to make that point. Over time I have slowly gathered the materials and tools I felt I would need having spent time using Templot, following threads on 'the other place' particularly that of John 'Hayfield' and reading all I could together with lurking as guest on this forum before I took that giant leap.

To go with the chairs, sleepers, gauges, rail and so forth my local area (Norfolk & Suffolk) group's 'track box' yielded a part used 85A kit for a B7. Most of it was there and I was persuaded to take the kit. The kit as most will know is for soldered construction whereas I want to use the plastic chaired construction method but as the 'V' and the switch blades were ready made I felt I could probably use these with other parts. Some slide chairs were also extracted from the box and I was kindly given some 'special' chairs by another member.

Today, I created a B7 in Templot, printed it out, stuck it down and aligned my double sided tape along the edges. I then prepared and fixed in place the sleepers to fit the template. The Exactoscale point timbers fitted the plan exactly although I had to cut the 34mm length required from longer ones. So far so good. I hope/think it looks right.

I offered up the V and then looked at the template, all seemed to be in order. Although I note that the V has a sharp point rather than a blunt nose. And so I faced my first conundrum - should my nose be pointed or blunt. Helpfully, Martin's Templot print outs show positions for both types although the blunt one rests on the 'A'' timber and the pointed is shown in mid air between 'X' & 'A'. I suspect the latter is theoretical.

The 85A kit had come with printed plans for the point and comparing this with the Templot ouput showed another difference. This is where the bend in the wing rails falls. The kit plan has this placed futher back than the Templot. As the kit had come with ready bent wing rails I had hoped to use these but my instinct is to follow the Templot plan which will mean creating my own. The 'reach length' of ready bent ones is a little too short for the Templot plan.

I've attached some pictures which (proudly) show my progress and also demonstrate the two conumdrums- position of the point and the wing rails.
I would be really grateful for any observations anybody reading this might have.

Many thanks, and seasons greetings to all.

WP_20161219_19_10_23_Pro[1].jpg

WP_20161219_15_21_58_Pro[1].jpg

WP_20161219_19_10_33_Pro[1].jpg

[RichardS]

I've just spotted an error in my OP. It is the Templot plan which has the wing rail bend further back. On the 85A plan it is between 'X' and 'A'.
Apologies for confusion.

[grovenor-2685]

It looks to be between X and A on both plans, as it should be if you are using P4 settings.
The bend would move a bit if you used exact scale settings (S4) instead.

However the position when building should be set by the gauges, not by the printout, and the sharpness of the crossing nose does not affect the position of the vee. But it is best to blunt it just a bit, then fit the crossing nose at the correct blunt nose position on the A timber, a nose in midair looks bad.
http://www.norgrove.me.uk/points.html
Regards

[RichardS]

Thank you for your comments Keith.

Having looked through your web page - very helpful - I can see how to do the bend in the wing rails now.

Be assured that I was not planning to 'put my nose in mid-air.' I was aware that it should be on 'A' but the two marks on the Templot plan caused me to hesitate.

Best wishes

[stephenfreeman]

The little red cross in front of the Vee is as you suspected, there to show where a sharp pointed vee would be. It is the "Fine Point" in Templot speak. You can ignore it for building a normal turnout with a blunt nose but it does have its use when it comes to designing things like 3 ways.

[RichardS]

Thank you Stephen.

I haven't fixed the V yet; as usual other things have intervened. Hopefully I'll do it Friday.

It's amazing how many things I have needed to get just to make one point - and I have a reasonably well equipped modelling tool kit. Today it was some new (cheapish) paint brushes for plastic solvent application. The old one had 'had it' and I was loathe to relegate a still usable better quality brush.
And now I need to print off another plan so i can see where the rails go in principle as the sleepers have covered the detail on the first one.
I suppose experienced builders and pro's like your self do these fairly elemental steps with second nature. Maybe I will one day.

[Andy W]

Richard I'm still a newbie when it comes to track building but am getting more confident.The best way to learn is to get stuck in. As you have seen, others on this forum will help when you have a problem, and you can't go far wrong if you follow Keith's excellent thread. You do need a few new tools and jigs etc when you start, but once acquired they should last a lifetime.

[Colin Parks]

Hi Andy,

I am not much further in point building than yourself, but one thing is for sure: print off at least one extra copy of your Templot templates, preferably two. I have three printed copies of each template in all, with one stuck on an assembly board where the sleepers go, a second for bending and trying rail assemblies and the third stuck to the base board for track laying.

Looking at my Templot plans (admittedly produced for flat-bottom rails, but that doesn't alter the geometry), the wing rail bend is just as on your Templot print, not like the 85A plan.

If you leave the point nose sharp, there is an increased risk of derailments (I could be corrected on this by those who know better). The most satisfying part of building a P4 point for me is running a wagon smoothly across the newly made common crossing with the wheel supported from closure rail to point nose and no perceivable 'dip' in its progress.

All the best,

Colin

[Paul Willis]

And now I need to print off another plan so i can see where the rails go in principle as the sleepers have covered the detail on the first one.
I suppose experienced builders and pro's like your self do these fairly elemental steps with second nature. Maybe I will one day.

Hi Richard,

You'd be surprised...

For me, I build track so infrequently that each time I do, I reach for the Society Digest Sheet 23.6.1 to make sure I don't forget something on the way through.

Of course practice adds confidence, yet I'd rather refer to the instructions to do things correctly. You look as though you're progressing well. Welcome to the Forum, and happy modelling!

Cheers
Flymo

[Martin Wynne]

Hi Richard,

Something you may not have realised is that the 85A kit was made by yours truly. The one you have there is about 35 years old. I supplied the vees sharp because they were also used in 00 kits. In those days 00 gauge was bedevilled with over-wide flangeways for the wheels in use (still is in many ways), with many 00 modellers assuming that wheels were intended to drop into crossings with a bump. Making the vees sharp so that they can be pushed as far forward as possible between the wing rails helps to minimize that effect. Sharp vees can be blunted back by those who know what they are doing, but blunt ones can't be made sharper.

Note when blunting the vee that the tip is annealed quite soft from the red-heat used in manufacture, so easily damaged. Blunt it with abrasive paper glued to a flat bit of wood, rather than a file. The upside is that it won't fall apart if you need to solder it as part of the assembly.

A trip down Memory Lane:



I suggest you discard the original blue template and use the Templot print. The original templates were hand-drawn, so not as precise as Templot. The chair outlines correspond to my original "Kit-Trak" milled copper-clad timbers and not the prototype. Please ignore them and refer to a Scalefour Soc. template for the proper chair outlines. The PDF downloads are extremely detailed and can be zoomed to 800% or more to reveal the full detail (but ignore the timber spacing on them for the wing-rail front and front joint position, refer to the Templot print for that).

regards,

Martin.

[Alan Turner]

A guessing stick! If I am not mistaken an Aristo Studio.

regards

Alan

[RichardS]

Thank you all for the helpful comments, pointers and advice.

I had realised that the 85A kit was one of your's Martin. In fact when I saw it in the group's track box I was keen to have a look at as I had not seen one before. I am impressed by the milled CC sleepers although I am not using them. Even the small piece of wet and dry paper was still there. But yes I am using a Templot plan. I was just looking at the one from the kit for reference

Thank you for the tips, I was afraid you would send me 'East of Yarmouth' after using A**R***l to produce a track plan. (Although, I must say it was handy for a small general arrangement.)

Kindest regards

[Colin Parks]

I certainly agree with Martin re. blunting the vee tip/point nose with care. During the making of one of my crossing vees, I made one swipe or two too many with a needle file and the this caused wheels to dip down into the crossing when assembled. Tried to ignore it, but eventually remade the point and splice rails with just the barest blunting to match the template - lo and behold, no 'dipping'!

Colin

[RichardS]

I certainly agree with Martin re. blunting the vee tip/point nose with care. During the making of one of my crossing vees, I made one swipe or two too many with a needle file and the this caused wheels to dip down into the crossing when assembled. Tried to ignore it, but eventually remade the point and splice rails with just the barest blunting to match the template - lo and behold, no 'dipping'!
Colin

That's a useful comment Colin. I was wondering how much 'bluntness' to actually apply. I'm know I had read about it somewhere and was going to check before mentioning that here if necessary but you have prempted me - and saved me time!

[Martin Wynne]

I was wondering how much 'bluntness' to actually apply.

Hi Richard,

Blunt nose for bullhead is 3/4" (except GWR 11/16").

That scales to 0.25mm. Test it against a piece of 10 thou plasticard on flat surface. Too little is better than too much blunting, unless you are modelling to S4-X standards.

regards,

Martin.

[RichardS]

I was wondering how much 'bluntness' to actually apply.

Hi Richard,

Blunt nose for bullhead is 3/4" (except GWR 11/16").

That scales to 0.25mm. Test it against a piece of 10 thou plasticard on flat surface. Too little is better than too much blunting, unless you are modelling to S4-X standards.

regards,

Martin.

Thank you

[Colin Parks]

Hi Richard.

10 thou. is what it came to on my blunt noses (albeit, as I now remember, on B8 crossings), The one that was over-filed was 20 thou. on the blunt face - disaster!

Colin

[John Fitton]

I enjoy the philosophical conundrum of the chicken and the egg, but the way I have reasoned it out the egg came first, so whenever this particular conundrum appears, if I can identify the egg then the puzzle is solved. Of course, the track is the egg. In real life the track had to be laid before the rolling stock could roll. Also, when the trains are late, or have departed, all we can see is the track. And since the track can only really be made to one set of standards, it is best to start with it (unlike rolling stock which can be made rigid, equalized, compensate, or sprung...). Good luck with your track construction!

John Fitton

[junctionmad]

I enjoy the philosophical conundrum of the chicken and the egg, but the way I have reasoned it out the egg came first, so whenever this particular conundrum appears, if I can identify the egg then the puzzle is solved. Of course, the track is the egg. In real life the track had to be laid before the rolling stock could roll. Also, when the trains are late, or have departed, all we can see is the track. And since the track can only really be made to one set of standards, it is best to start with it (unlike rolling stock which can be made rigid, equalized, compensate, or sprung...). Good luck with your track construction!

John Fitton

In the USA , you could start a church

[RichardS]

It's 4 months since I last recorded my tribulations but I have not been entirely idle. The point is now fixed to my test board and all the wires joined to it. I built a TOU based on that described on the CLAG website and as fitted to 'Green Street.' It bears a passing resemblance to the original and works....

WP_20170315_09_59_47_Pro.jpg

Next decision - how to operate it.

Due to poor planning I had not left enough space around where I had put the point to actually get any point motor in! Doh!

A trip to Coastal DCC in Ipswich and I was the proud owner of a Tam Valley servo and a Singlet servo controller. When fitted and wired in it worked but I discovered that I needed to fit stretcher tie-bars to the point blades and this is where I am now.

I had bought a set of Ambis Engineering's etched tie-bars (well the ends at least) at Stevenage in January and these I approached, pliers in hand, and set about them with probably more hope than skill. The instructions and the website have pictures of the brackets in various stages of fold and bend but to be honest are not all that clear.

It's a good job the etch has 28 parts! After 6 I have yet to work out how the twists go. And I'm wondering if anybody has any photos of these brackets fitted to points which might illustrate how they go.

I think they'll look good if I can get them sorted.

Thank in advance.
RichardS

[grovenor-2685]

One here, albeit not adjusted properly!
Might help

Regards

[stephenfreeman]

Hi,
Which type of Ambis stretcher bars are you using? He does one for the early round type and one for the more modern, rectangular type.

I have both types here and I'll see if I can do some photos, perhaps tomorrow.

[RichardS]

One here, albeit not adjusted properly!
Might help
Regards

Thanks for that Keith. I can see I may have to create space under the tie-bar as well to give it clearance room even though I've used thick sleepers.

I've also just noticed the other thread running on point control apologies all if I have repeated similar issues here.

[RichardS]

Hi,
Which type of Ambis stretcher bars are you using? He does one for the early round type and one for the more modern, rectangular type.

I have both types here and I'll see if I can do some photos, perhaps tomorrow.

Thanks Stephen, the ones I have make up into little brackets that you're supposed to fit some 'PCB' between which must mean they are the rectangular ones. In my ignorance I didn't know there were round ones available.

Looking at Keith's video again it looks to me as if the ones shown there are round ones.

Knowing what one needs and what is available from whom is quite a challenge.

Some pics (of both if poss) would be great if you have time, thank you.

[grovenor-2685]

Looking at Keith's video again it looks to me as if the ones shown there are round ones.

No the stretchers are the pcb strip on edge representing modern flexible stretchers, the round bar is just the connection from the drive crank.
I'll try and take a close up.
Regards