Dear All.

A sketch plan of the layout which I've named 'District 22 - Downtown L.A.' :

[attachment=15990]

Size: 76" x 30"
Gauge: HO
Track: Scratch Built
Control: DC wired with live frog principle so also possible to use DCC. Powered by Black Cat Technology Feedback LC-101 controller via a single unit Gaugemaster transformer (I'm assured this gives excellent slow running qualities).
Turnouts controlled by Peco point motors on Peco part no. PL-12 sprung bases, via wire-in-tube.
Loco: Bog standard Bachmann GP38-2 in Chessie livery (the aim is to turn this into a weather beaten patched loco).

Think that's about it really.

Jonte

Oh yeah; almost forgot:

Viewing will be via the usual diorama type 'letter box' arrangement, therefore in the interests of storage, the height will be no more than 12" (which also means low buildings).

Lighting will be via a couple of artificial daylight fluorescents - although I might only use one if the shadows thrown onto the back scene aren't too obvious - kindly donated to the project by my pet Hermann Tortoise 'Olive'. Thank you Olive. Unfortunately, the vet advises I change these every six months, despite the fact there's plenty of life left in them, so I've pretty much an endless supply.

And btw: Industries 'A' and 'B' on the front side of the plan won't be modelled otherwise the whole thing will become cluttered. The ringed figures '1,2 & 3' are spots for the cars.

Best wishes,

Jonte

Happy New Year Jonte.

Good to see you back on Big Blue and returning to US modelling. You've certainly made a good start with this project, it certainly looks built to last,

and I hope you are able to complete the layout, as you've had a few 'false starts' in the past. Look forward to seeing your progress.

Mal

alcanman Wrote:Happy New Year Jonte.

Good to see you back on Big Blue and returning to US modelling. You've certainly made a good start with this project, it certainly looks built to last,

and I hope you are able to complete the layout, as you've had a few 'false starts' in the past. Look forward to seeing your progress.

Mal

Thanks, Mal, and a very Happy New Year to you too.

It's built to last alright: as I said earlier, it's a real back breaker and getting heavier. Hopefully won't have to lift it too often, but the handles and the hand hold in the middle are great for man handling it. I'm going to try and keep everything within the bounds of the door so there's nothing to add to the difficulties in manouvering and thus nothing to get knocked off. It's only simple as you can see, but so far I'm very pleased with it.

You're spot on about the false starts, Mal, and this is one reason why I haven't posted until now. Most of the 'thinking' and testing that can dampen one's enthusiasm have been done, and as there's not much track involved, I can soon get things moving, so at least I can have a play if there's not much time for construction. I can then take my time knocking together the few buildings required and hopefully provide some enjoyment in the process.

Thanks for your interest, Mal, and it's good to be back.

Jonte

Some progress on the angles crossing referred to in my previous post.

[attachment=16003][attachment=16004][attachment=16005][attachment=16006][attachment=16007].

Jonte

Testing from both sides:

[attachment=16008][attachment=16009]

Everything smooth enough.

Just a little finishing with a file before the whole can be electrically isolated using a carbide disc in my modelling drill. Finally, a scrub with a suitable abrasive bathroom cleaner using an old toothbrush and then a quick rinse.

Again, the flangeways are intentionally a little generous in width; conversely, the gaps for cross rail are as narrow as I can make them: I discovered last time that anything wider makes the cars rattle across them and annoyingly, when pushed through at a snails pace, the wheels can fall back into the gaps like those little ball bearings into holes in the boards of some novelty games. I'm sure you've all played them!!!

Anyway, just a small curved section to make in the siding leading from the crossing, then track building on the scenic section is finished and I can move onto drilling out for the wiring.

Jonte

A short interlude, if I may.

Just been mentioning to Koos (on his excellent thread) how much of a minefield I've found the RTR route to be. In fact you may remember me expressing my deep disappointment in the ME product, which looks so fine.

Needless to say, although it broke my heart, the rails were put to good use on that Victorian station roof I mentioned earlier, when I started to run drastically short of the stuff

[attachment=16019][attachment=16018][attachment=16017][attachment=16016]

They're the darker rails on the apexes, as I bought the weathered variety (a nightmare to clean up for soldering an smelly too!).

A darned shame, but there you go.

Jonte

A wonderful demonstration of the arts of soldering and patience I hope you plan to add a roof/cover/skin that permits still a good view at this fine art work.

faraway Wrote:A wonderful demonstration of the arts of soldering and patience I hope you plan to add a roof/cover/skin that permits still a good view at this fine art work.

Very kind comments, Reinhard, thank you.

Once I'd given it some thought, it was quite a simple exercise in repetition and I spent a rather pleasant summer out in the garden enjoying the bird song without having to inhale those noxious solder fumes.

I'm rather pleased with the results and the question of whether to glaze/cover the roof is a bit of a quandary. I've considered almost every option from just glazing the side pieces and the front panels to leaving the whole lot open. I think the solution lies somewhere between both extremes. As my chosen time period is early to mid sixties London Midland region, I can get away with a piecemeal glazing approach as a number by this time were starting to become derelict, and having sustained damaged glass panels, British Rail lacked the wherewithal to repair them. This would then give me the excuse to still see some of the trusses from above and provide a tantalising glimpse of the trains at their platforms below.

Finally, the intention is to extend the roof, as many Victorian stations were once rolling stock got longer e.g. London Euston, using kit bashed parts from the Dapol station awning kit (approximatley eight kits will be required). This will be almost totally glazed - a little easier than glazing the metal structure - although most of it will be obscured by heavy weathering to represent soot stained station rooves (oh those dirty ol' steam engines!).

Thanks for your interest,

Jonte

All track building is complete, apart from laying the (Peco) tracks on the traverser and exit/entry roads.

The final bits have been electrically isolated, so all that is required is to remove and rinse them off to get rid of the flux residue.

Here are some photos of the final sections of track in situ.

[attachment=16031]

Some 'aerial' shots'/ just above eye level shot to illustrate the track plan.

[attachment=16030][attachment=16029][attachment=16028]

[attachment=16027]

Next step will be to mark out the positions of the fishplates between each section of track, and then drill holes to accommodate the wires which will be sldered to them.

Jonte

Hi

For those who suspect I may have lost interest already I post the following

One aspect of the build that has been bugging me for the last couple of days relates to the points at either end of the main track bed where the Setrack curves join the scratch built (SB) turnouts. Constructed of rails of different codes (Code 100 Setrack - Code 75 SB), I'd a couple of methods in mind for joining the two e.g. overlapping soldered joints or butt joints soldered to brass screws. However, whichever method I chose, the head of the Code 100 track would require 'filing' to match the thinner width of the Code 75 - this would be exacerbated by the quite tight radius of the curve AND the fact that the SB track and the Setrack are of differing heights; and all within the viewing area.

The solution, as far as I could see, would be to transfer the joins in the track to the 'out of view' area i.e. behind the back scene. To that end, I have replaced the first Setrack curves (where they join the scratchbuilt track) with handbuilt ones:

[attachment=16062][attachment=16061]

I'd intended to join them to their neighbours (the next piece of curve) via overlapped soldered joints, however, in a moment of distraction I went and snipped off the excess
I shall, therefore, solder the rails either side of the joints to brass screws and then 'feather' the rails accordingly.

One bonus of all this was that it allowed me to address a further matter that had been bothering me: to date, I'd yet to test the clearance of the guide rails (fitted in hindsight, you may recall, to the turnout at the exit from the canyon) with the locomotive (a car bogie goes through unhindered). If you recall, the flangeways were like canyons out of necessity owing to the courseness of scale (and my track building skills aren't the best ), however, it still bothered me. Anyway, after wiring it up briefly to the controller, evrything was fine and my concerns were unfounded. Still, I'll keep an eye to it.

Regards for now,

Jonte

monte Wrote:... the head of the Code 100 track would require 'filing' to match the thinner width of the Code 75 ...

I would expect to find exact the same distance between the rails of Code 100 and Code 75 tracks. I think that is what makes the H0 gauge (16.5mm)?
However, I did never hand lay any tracks and it is pure speculation.

faraway Wrote:

monte Wrote:... the head of the Code 100 track would require 'filing' to match the thinner width of the Code 75 ...

I would expect to find exact the same distance between the rails of Code 100 and Code 75 tracks. I think that is what makes the H0 gauge (16.5mm)?
However, I did never hand lay any tracks and it is pure speculation.

Spot on, Reinhard.

The gauge of 16.5mm remains the same for both, however, the code 100 is not only higher than the code 75 but also wider. Therefore, the width of the head of the rail would have to be thinned down which would be apparent when viewed end on, as would be the case here, so postponing until out of view wouldn't matter.

I hope that makes sense :?

Thanks for your interest, Reinhard.

Jonte

I am glad I got that right. The outside is an optical issue "only"
I see three alternatives if the transition has to be in a visible spot

1. direct attached like the prototype
2. a short transition e.g 1/10"
3. a smooth transition e.g. 1/2" - 1/1"

I would recommend to do three test connections inclusive a quick weathering of the sides and a shiny rail head.

faraway Wrote:I am glad I got that right. The outside is an optical issue "only"
I see three alternatives if the transition has to be in a visible spot

1. direct attached like the prototype
2. a short transition e.g 1/10"
3. a smooth transition e.g. 1/2" - 1/1"

I would recommend to do three test connections inclusive a quick weathering of the sides and a shiny rail head.

Gosh, Reinhard!! Me thinks you have far greater knowledge of this subject than your letting on

I've come across 'transitions' before but I'm afraid it's all a little too technical for a simple 'table top railroader' like me, so I'll opt for the straightforward solution of just keeping the joints out of sight

Thanks again for your interest.

Jonte