Templot Club Archive 2007-2020
|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 4 Mar 2011 21:19 from: julia click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
While I am working nicely on my current two layouts (H0e German Narrow gauge & BR(S) standard gauge), I find myself plotting my next layout. It being an activity I can do when the hour of the day precludes my use of tools etc... But this layout is a bit of a step up from my current layouts. I would like to build based on the prototype, and in this case the station I have chosen is going to be about 10m long in OO scale. including the approaches. By about 1m wide. As the subject suggests, its abit epic. These measurements assume that I am not trying to compress it in length to much. There is some potential for longitudinal compression, but I think this is limited. So I am happy for now to work on the basis of a length of approx 10m. The track plan shows approx 40 points (depending on how you count the esoteric ones). Now in an ideal world I would just buy some peco ones and be happy, but I feel that if I am to do this layout justice, they just aren't good enough. If I am to hold reasonably true to the original I will need to build a couple of the points for certain (interlaced points). So I wonder about building the whole lot. My main concern is that of time. Building 40 turnouts, even if I can get them to 2hours each, is a sizeable chunk of modelling. But perhaps a bit more fundamental a question, is how do I work out the geometry of each point? Its clear that the SER didn't have a set track box to play with, and so there is a probability that each point is going to be entirely different from the rest.... I am going to invest in the 25" to the mile map of the station sometime shortly, which will provide me with a more accurate plan to work from, But, beyond that I am not really sure where to start. This layout is an order of magnitude more than anything I have ever attempted before, but I think that if I can do it well, it will be a rather stunning model both to look at, and to operate. Can anyone point me in the right direction of where you would start this? What techniques and jigs are there that would be of use to make constructing so much track simpler? Would it be likely that the frogs used on all the points are the same, meaning that I can get away with a single frog jig? Are there appropriate jigs for producing the point blades? I intend to use code 75 rail (Open to being convinced to use bullhead rail, else flatbottom). And the era it will be set in is approx 1950. Thanks Julia |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 00:32 from: Nigel Brown click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Julia Here's a few thoughts. Firstly, if you're going to have a bash at this epic, get it right, otherwise it's probably not worth it. So if the prototype uses BH rail, use BH. For switches and crossing V's, if you can afford it, both C&L and Exactoscale do switch blades, and C&L does crossing V's (not sure if Exactoscale does. The crossings don't cover all possibilities, just the main ones, but that may do for a lot of what you want. One way of working out what turnouts are needed is to get hold of a decent plan, import it into Templot as a background shape, and then try to reproduce it in Templot on top. In the absence of more detailed info that may be the best way; it should get you pretty close to what was used. Is it feasible? It'll take a fair bit of time, if you're prepared for that. Personally I found that once I got the hang of building track I enjoyed it, and have no problems with that. What I do have problems with is the rest of it; the wiring, the scenic work etc etc! Hope that helps Nigel |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 00:55 from: julia click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Nigel Brown wrote:Hi JuliaMy reservation about using C&L track is that reading up on it there are indications that many current Bachmann units don't work on the track due to the clearances. What ever I build needs to be able to work with any NEM compliant wheels. Do exactoscale do products for 16.5mm track? Does anyone make a chair that you can fit to soldered copperclad track after the build? The C&L Vee+blade pack looks ideal, not to pricey, and it would certainly speed up construction of a lot of points. I do however wonder if there is a jig available (I have seen hints of their existence but not actually found anyone selling one), then one of those may pay for itself on 40 sets of blades/vee's etc... One way of working out what turnouts are needed is to get hold of a decent plan, import it into Templot as a background shape, and then try to reproduce it in Templot on top. In the absence of more detailed info that may be the best way; it should get you pretty close to what was used.I have a large track plan that is just a sketch and is not a scale drawing, and also I am hoping to order a 25" to the mile OS map which would also do the task. I don't know which is the more accurate of these to work from with templot however. Is it feasible? It'll take a fair bit of time, if you're prepared for that. Personally I found that once I got the hang of building track I enjoyed it, and have no problems with that. What I do have problems with is the rest of it; the wiring, the scenic work etc etc!I already build the track for my H0e layout, but I am finding that it does take a long time to build. J |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 11:12 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
julia wrote:My reservation about using C&L track is that reading up on it there are indications that many current Bachmann units don't work on the track due to the clearances. What ever I build needs to be able to work with any NEM compliant wheels. Do exactoscale do products for 16.5mm track? It really is time this urban myth was laid to rest. Some years ago, Bachmann produced a loco, the wheels of which had enormous flanges. It was not only C+L's trackwork that was affected, for I think it would only run properly on Code 100 trackwork. Since then, I have failed to find any Bachmann or Hornby product that does not run well on our trackwork. The fact that we sell thousands of metres of our products for OO gauge modellers, supports this. So could we please drop this here and now? (Perhaps the next person who advances this suggestion on the Internet, would kindly email me with the name and address of his/her solicitor and the name of the partner who deals with their affairs, we could put this tale to rest on a legal basis). If you want speedy turnout construction, go for the following combination; Timber Tracks track bases. Ready assembled Common Crossings. Ready milled Switch Blades. C+L provide starter kits ioncorporating these items, as well as everything else need. They are available in OO, EM, P4, O-XF, F7 and S7 and are an ideal way to begin the move away from 'Toy Train Trackwork'. Regards Brian Lewis |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 11:33 from: julia click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote:It really is time this urban myth was laid to rest. Some years ago, Bachmann produced a loco, the wheels of which had enormous flanges. It was not only C+L's trackwork that was affected, for I think it would only run properly on Code 100 trackwork. Since then, I have failed to find any Bachmann or Hornby product that does not run well on our trackwork. The fact that we sell thousands of metres of our products for OO gauge modellers, supports this. So could we please drop this here and now? (Perhaps the next person who advances this suggestion on the Internet, would kindly email me with the name and address of his/her solicitor and the name of the partner who deals with their affairs, we could put this tale to rest on a legal basis). Perhaps it would be useful if this information was clearly available on your website, the information I found was through google, and was posts on various fora regarding which track system to choose. A statement indicating compliance with NEM standards would solve the problem of having to check with sources on forums. This is an issue with most British model railway producers. I would however like to say that I find your threat of legal action offensive and entirely uncalled for. I feel your post could have been put across in a politer fashion rather than an aggressive threat. We all know there is a proportion of nut jobs on the internet and that we should perhaps all take what they say with a pinch of salt, this is why I asked my question on this forum in the first place, to see if I could clarify if there was in fact any issue. But alas I just get attacked. Being on the receiving end of such an barrage is a sure way to put me off buying a product, and is yet another straw on the camels back that makes me want to give up on the Hobby of Railway modelling in the UK. J |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 11:54 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Julia. I do not understand why you are upset. Manufacturers have a duty to protect their products from unfound allegations that can harm them. I have lost count of the number of times I have tried to lay this particular 'ghost' to rest but, as you can see, I have been entirely unsuccessful. List owners clearly have a duty to prevent defamation appearing on their fora, (and I must say Andy York does a better job regarding this than does Martin Wynne). Perhaps it is because you see Court action different from me. My view is that if two or more people disagree and thus fail to reach a common decision, they should appoint a third party to arbitrate. It could be an independent arbitrator, a person appointed by a trade body, or a Court. It really is nothing more than that. I hope this explains my position. Regards Brian Lewis julia wrote: Brian Lewis wrote: |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 12:09 from: julia click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote:Hi Julia. Court is an expensive process for anyone and is typically used by the big guy to intimidate the little guy (or Girl in this case). I asked an innocent question to try and check something, seeking clarification and input. You give me a legal threat. That is not a good way to do business and I can say that I am distinctly disinclined to purchase anything from C&L in future. You could have simply said "nah, that's an urban myth, bachmann made a dodgy loco years ago, but its fine now." and we would all be happy and you would perhaps have had a sale by now. Instead you have a potential costumer who is feeling attacked and who is now likely to not recommend your products to anyone. I wouldn't have needed to even ask if your site clearly stated that your track was built to NEM standards, that would thus disprove to the world any issues. It is also worth noting that I am not disagreeing with you, I am asking a forum of people who I had hither too respected as knowledgeable sources of information. There is thus no need for a 3rd party to act as arbitrator. This has blown entirely out of proportion, I asked for clarification, that was all. J |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 12:13 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote:List owners clearly have a duty to prevent defamation appearing on their fora, (and I must say Andy York does a better job regarding this than does Martin Wynne).Hi Brian, The current legal position appears to be that forum owners assume responsibility for the content if they edit it in some way. If the content is left exactly as posted, responsibility for it remains with the contributor. I'm not aware of any defamation on this web site. If you draw my attention to any such, I will certainly deal with it. Having myself modified your track to clear Hambling's wheels, I can understand Julia's concern. Perhaps you can clarify which locomotives do or don't run on your track? You mentioned "a loco" which doesn't, but without specifying which one. It may be the very one which Julia wishes to run. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 12:24 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
But I was not threatening you Julia, so I do not see why you were upset. Ask yourself, If you were a manufacturer, would you put up with the constant sniping of your products. As for being disinclined to buy our products in future, that is a judgement only you can make. But surely purchasing criteria is generally reckoned to be on the basis of, the quality of the product, the quantity you get for your money, the price you have to pay, the delivery time, and the supplier services - all neatly encapsulated in the acroynym QQPDS. Nowhere does it say you have to like the person.... :-) Regards Brian Lewis julia wrote: Brian Lewis wrote: |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 12:30 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Err.... perhaps you will tel us exactly what year you did this Martin. It sounds to me like it was years ago. What trackwork were you using OO, EM or P4? And what happened to Hambling's wheels pray? As for which Bachmann loco fouled the chairs, it was a few years ago. Pathetic excuse I know, but since I had those two cancer operations my memory fails me continually. Perhaps some of your list members could advise. Regards Brian Lewis Martin Wynne wrote:
|
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 12:41 from: julia click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote:But I was not threatening you Julia, so I do not see why you were upset. Ask yourself, If you were a manufacturer, would you put up with the constant sniping of your products. As for being disinclined to buy our products in future, that is a judgement only you can make. Suggesting that people who continue "this myth" will be taken to court to settle this once and for all would be seen as an aggressive act. The implication is that you see me as one of those spreading the myth and that you would like to take me to court over the matter. It doesn't matter if that is how you intended it, that is how it is received. The only way to stop the "constant sniping" is through openness and honesty, something that as yet you have not provided me with. But surely purchasing criteria is generally reckoned to be on the basis of, the quality of the product, the quantity you get for your money, the price you have to pay, the delivery time, and the supplier services - all neatly encapsulated in the acroynym QQPDS. Nowhere does it say you have to like the person.... :-) Yes and no, the other dimension that you have missed is quality of service. If I phone up to ask a question, I expect to get an honest answer not a threat of a law suit, if I phone up because something didn't fit right, or a part was missing, I expect good customer service, not a law suit. Your quality can be the best in the world, but if your public relations and customer service lets you down, then you go out of business, its basic economics. It also remains, that in all your efforts to dispel this myth in this post, you have spoken at length about legal avenues, but you have not yet mentioned what the bachmann loco that had issues is, I don't have much stock, but there is a small probability I might own that item. You have also not given any indication that your track is NEM complaint, something that I mentioned in my second post in this thread. Regardless of how your comments were intended, some might consider that perhaps an apology would be polite. J |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 12:58 from: Brian Lewis
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
But why should NEM standards be of interest to any UK based trackwork system? NEM is European, not British. I would have thought you would have known that. UK trackwork is, or should be, made to BRMSB standards, although these are somewhat outdated, (like Hamblings wheels..... :-) ). Regards Brian Lewis. Now this really is going to be my last entry on this. Getting into Templot Group is a nightmare. Every time it demands a password, which is case sensitive. I have difficulty in remembering and certainly do not understand why it is such a secret society. So it is goodbye. Martin, perhaps you would unsubscribe me please. Regards Brian Lewis julia wrote:
|
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 13:12 from: julia click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote:But why should NEM standards be of interest to any UK based trackwork system? NEM is European, not British. I would have thought you would have known that. Because Britain, whether you like it or not is part of Europe, and has been since it's inception. NEM standards for trackwork provide a perfect base upon which we the consumers can depend. Knowing that our rolling stock is built to NEM standards (oh look NEM wheels and NEM coupler pockets), means we know they will work with track built to NEM standards. And everyone is happy. Rather than trying to create some crackpot standard, that is separate from, and incompatible with those of the rest of the world, it would be a simpler if Britain could adopt fully those standards from NEM. I am interoperating with other track which is built to NEM standards, thus it is important to me as a European modeller. Oh, and you have made an assumption, at no point did I say I was British.
That is entirely your choice, I think that at all times in this thread you have over reacted and entirely failed to make me want to purchase C&L products. I wish you all the best for the future. Now with that settled can we take this thread back on topic and to the questions I asked in the first place. Thanks Julia |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 13:15 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote: Err.... perhaps you will tell us exactly what year you did this Martin. It sounds to me like it was years ago. What trackwork were you using OO, EM or P4? And what happened to Hambling's wheels pray?Hi Brian, It was about 7 or 8 years ago. Are you saying your EM flexi track has been re-tooled in that time? The solution was to file a soldering iron bit to the shape of the wheel profile, and run it along the top of the rail. This will melt just enough plastic off the top of the chair jaws to clear the wheels. Surprisingly, after painting this is barely noticeable -- visitors who have seen this railway have never noticed it. The track in the foreground has been so treated (C&L flexi track, EM gauge): penwyllt_700.jpg  Are you asking me what happened to the Hambling's wheels in question, or what happened to the supply of Hambling's wheels? The wheel flanges bumped along the chair tops with a loud clicking noise. The fix above cured it completely. I've no idea what happened to the supply of Hambling's wheels or who now owns the tooling. regards, Martin. |
||
|
posted: 5 Mar 2011 13:30 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Brian Lewis wrote:Now this really is going to be my last entry on this. Getting into Templot Group is a nightmare. Every time it demands a password, which is case sensitive. I have difficulty in rememberingHi Brian, Please set your browser to allow persistent cookies for the domain 85a.co.uk . When your browser asks if the user name and password are to be saved, answer yes. The cookie for this site is valid for 5 years. Once you are logged in the first time, you will always be logged in automatically when you visit the site. and certainly do not understand why it is such a secret society.First you complain about defamation on here, but now you want me to allow the whole world to post messages here without any check or control? The vast majority of members have no trouble at all. They register a user name and a password, and that's it. When they come here they are already logged in. But it's up to you to be in control of your own web browser. regards, Martin. |
||
| Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |