Kirkby Luneside (Original): End of the line....

[Physicsman]

Jeff, just a thought, you want a BIGGIE, (if you'll pardon the expression)     then why not use the existing two track main Viaduct at the bottom of the plan and build a LONGER one, possibly an extra two arches or so on that lovely long gentle top curve, it could be about 4 ft long at least .

 

Bodgit, (The Man from the planning Dept.)

 

That is quite remarkable!

 

After Chip reminded me last night that the branch viaduct was only single track, I sat and thought about the viaduct options....

 

I must admit that I considered buiding a 9 arch curved viaduct as there's plenty of space. It would be quite a job, but I could build it at any point as I'd assume a value for the track curvature, just like I did in 2012 (6 months before I laid the track). I'd probably go for a 65 - 70" radius for the outer track, as last time. The advantage this time though, would be that I actually HAVE track and tracksettas, so I could get the curve set even better.

 

It's certainly an option and a great project for the new year - and there's now plenty of workspace in the bunker!

 

Jeff

[Andrew P]

Hi Jeff, I would go for 70 and bring the curve in tighter towards the fiddle yard, I'm off to do some weathering with the OTHER Jeff, (Binny) now so will look in again later.

 

Bodge

Binny and Bodge went out to Spray, hoo ray hoo ray hoo ray.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Andrew P

[Physicsman]

Andy,

 

Here's the outline for KL2 with the 2 curved viaducts. The original, now placed at the bottom, the new one - all 6 feet of it (9 arches) - at the top.

 

It gives an idea of how the new structure will fit in. The top curve over this viaduct averages at around 70".

 

Enjoy your weathering!

 

Jeff

 

[ChrisN]

Andy,

 

Here's the outline for KL2 with the 2 curved viaducts. The original, now placed at the bottom, the new one - all 6 feet of it (9 arches) - at the top.

 

It gives an idea of how the new structure will fit in. The top curve over this viaduct averages at around 70".

 

Enjoy your weathering!

 

Jeff

 

Modified viaducts Dec 6.jpg

 

Jeff,

Looking at your diagram the viaduct does not have a single curve but is tighter at one end than the other.  Is that just the way it is drawn?  I am a little concerned that if you build the viaduct first that it will not fit, or you will have to compromise what you want to fit it in.

[robmcg]

...

 

The Zephyr was one of three larger FORD cars, along with the Consul (smallest of them) and Zodiac(largest). All had the good old bench seats and a column change for the manual gearbox. Wonderful cars to take your latest flame out into the country for a little slap and tickle!

 

Indeed anyone who owned a Ford Zephyr Mk1 was someone!   6 cylinders, and speedos which went to over 90mph.

 

A statistically important proportion of the NZ population born in the mid-late 1950s owes a lot to the car,  in fact all those lovely British cars with column shift and bench front seats; Hillmans, Humbers, Vauxhaulls... stop it I'll become tearful.

Edited December 6, 2013 by robmcg

[Jason T]

I spot another flaw in the plan. The bottom viaduct has the NER line pass underneath and the curve sharply towards the FY; you will be able to see it and the vanishing river through the arches, and it really tightens up the curve on the branch. Is there any reason for two viaducts other than you like them as I reckon the lower one will cause you headaches (as will modelling 16' of river).

[robmcg]

Why not build KL2 without the NER loop but leave room for the possibility?

 

Always ready for plans which involve less work, me...   or, it would be a case of 'less is more'  and the NER a separate diorama if desired...

 

I try not to advance opinions where I take no responsibility for the idea, but I don't quite understand the role of the NER bit, and it's a bit 'American' for my tastes,  too many railways in one space.  In other words, more scenery, less railway is good.

 

typo edit

Edited December 6, 2013 by robmcg

[Jason T]

See what you mean Rob, but the NER did pass pretty close to KS West and was just as much a part of the area as the S&C. If Jeff has had chance to look at the book I loaned him (as well as the Cumbrian Railway Photography one that I insisted he took), them you can expect a lot of Moguls appearing very soon

 

p.s. Jeff, if you have looked through the Cumbrian books, I take it you can now see why I so want to model Sandside at some point

[robmcg]

Yes the NER influence in the area was great, with all the traffic via Kirkby Stephen, and the MR/NER thing at Hawes, my only books with the flavour of those days in the steam era are O S Nock books on engine performance, so I can see why the NER branch has a presence in KL2. The industrial glories ? of the age....  (I wouldn't have wanted to be working class in the North East in the first half of the C20th...  but upper middle or gentry, yes thanks.)

 

 being lazy.... 

 

I must go and open three new boxes which arrived yesterday, a B1 a green Duchess and a green A3 all weathered, but it's too dark for photos, heavy grey cloud.

[Physicsman]

Please don't take the diagrams literally.

 

They are indicative - the Anyrail programme is useful, but all the turnout sizes are too short (being Peco) and the real thing will have transition curves throughout. The large viaduct curves will be set at large enough radii to match anything at the top end of the layout.

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

See what you mean Rob, but the NER did pass pretty close to KS West and was just as much a part of the area as the S&C. If Jeff has had chance to look at the book I loaned him (as well as the Cumbrian Railway Photography one that I insisted he took), them you can expect a lot of Moguls appearing very soon

 

p.s. Jeff, if you have looked through the Cumbrian books, I take it you can now see why I so want to model Sandside at some point

 

Hi Jason.

 

Oh yes, I've looked through the books!!

 

As for the lower viaduct. It DOES present some complications - as there's supposed to be a cutting into the fiddle yard - as on KL. I'll happily consider options - sketches, please?

 

Remember, it'll probably be the best part of a year before I start building!

 

Jeff

[Andrew P]

Andy,

 

Here's the outline for KL2 with the 2 curved viaducts. The original, now placed at the bottom, the new one - all 6 feet of it (9 arches) - at the top.

 

It gives an idea of how the new structure will fit in. The top curve over this viaduct averages at around 70".

 

Enjoy your weathering!

 

Jeff

 

Modified viaducts Dec 6.jpg

Wow, Jeff, this really is developing nicely, roll on 2015 and the Lunester operating team can come and have a PROPER play.

 

I will post some pics on LL later of last nights weathering, surfice to say it was a good evening and a lot was done in a short space of time, (about 2 1/2 Hours).

 

Bodge

[Andrew P]

Jeff, I still think ONE river is too much, break it into a couple going off the edge of the board and the line will look longer and LESS CONNECTED and less like a model.

 

A wide fast flowing rocky river through the S & C top Viaduct.

A meandering stream through the NER Viaduct.

And another rocky partly grass covered stream through the lower S & C Viaduct.

 

Imagination tell you they will join up somewhere off scene.

 

I am taking inspiration from the Station track layout, very workable and as its the prototype it looks right and not like I have always done, make it up as I go along, (or Bodge it) hahaha

 

Catch up again later.

Bodge

[Andrew P]

Hi Jason.

 

Oh yes, I've looked through the books!!

 

As for the lower viaduct. It DOES present some complications - as there's supposed to be a cutting into the fiddle yard - as on KL. I'll happily consider options - sketches, please?

 

Remember, it'll probably be the best part of a year before I start building!

 

Jeff

Jeff Just a though, if you move the lower Viaduct a few inches to the right and take the NER line at the bottom into a cutting and then into a tunnel it may look better and less like a mirror image of the other end of the layout so doing away with NER going through a Viaduct at both ends.

Another excuse for a rocky cutting about a foot long and looking good from the operating seat.

 

Bodge

[Jason T]

Totally agree on the station front, it looks right because it IS right. The branch connection had too many short spurs coming off it originally and losing the branch connection will improve the scene immeasurably (in my opinion).

[Physicsman]

Totally agree on the station front, it looks right because it IS right. The branch connection had too many short spurs coming off it originally and losing the branch connection will improve the scene immeasurably (in my opinion).

 

Agreed. I should have stuck with the (simpler) prototype from the start - as you kept telling me!!

 

Here is the modified top, with the stream now only about 6' long.

 

As for the bottom bit - I need to think a bit more. Keep the suggestions coming.

 

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

Ok, always happy to throw your ideas back for digestion....

 

Here you are Andy, Jason et al. Comments...?

 

 

Jeff

 

 

[Andrew P]

Hi Jeff I still think that the top steam  needs to be broken into two, I would say bring the top stream from the S & C Viaduct down to the right to the baseboard edge, and the NER strait out to the right baseboard edge.

Its a pity the NER line cant come down a bit more BUT you may find once the boards are in place that it works well.

 

Bodgit

[Physicsman]

Hi Jeff I still think that the top steam  needs to be broken into two, I would say bring the top stream from the S & C Viaduct down to the right to the baseboard edge, and the NER strait out to the right baseboard edge.

Its a pity the NER line cant come down a bit more BUT you may find once the boards are in place that it works well.

 

Bodgit

 

Hi Andy.

 

You'll have to be a bit more precise as I can't visualise your last suggestion. If anybody wants to sketch it, stick it on here. I'll have a look after I've helped my brother clear out his loft!

 

Jeff

[Andrew P]

Jeff, what I am thinking of is the steam at the top of the plan is divided into two, and comes DOWN under the S & C Viaduct, if it then turned RIGHT instead of left towards the Station but dropped off the base board edge it would look better.

The NER stream could then flow Left to Right under the Viaduct from baseboard edge to Baseboard edge.

Thus forming TWO streams of differing sorts, and a third at the lower S & C Viaduct.

 

The top S & C Stream being fairly wide, rocky and fast flowing with quite a drop from back to front of a couple of inches  and a reason for some nice rock outcrops and water falls over rocks.

 

The NER stream could be flatter and more meandering across the Valley floor.

 

The lower S & C stream could again have a drop in height from back to front but be a bit narrower thus giving TREE differing scenic features as apposed to one long flat one.

 

I hope this makes a bit more sense.

Bodgit

[Jason T]

At the moment, you have two separate rivers; despite both going off scene, there is no way either could link up and there is nowhere for them to run to. If the top stream turned into the operating well then it would make more sense as we are then picking up the same river as it crosses under the railway at the bottom.

 

I do think that the NER route should pass under the S&C again at the bottom, if not via a viaduct then by a smaller girder bridge or similar sized brick / stone structure. There were no tunnels (as far as I recall) on the KS East to Tebay section of the Stainmore route.

 

Maybe the sharpish curve of the NER after the viaduct could be hidden by trees in the valley bottom?

[Andrew P]

I like Jason's suggestion of the NER line going into a wooded cutting after passing under the S & C Line.

 

Bodgit

[67A]

Thanks for the Pics Mike, that is almost exactly what I have drawn on my plan, I had a gated entrance on a Garage Layout when I lived down South and as I will be all on one level it will work a treat.

 

Yours is really neat, have you any pics with the track on or is that as far as you've got?

 

Bodgit

Hi Andy,

 

This was a baseboard job we done for the owner of Morley controllers, I have not seen any more since we completed the job I'm sorry to say.

[67A]

Rob, I think you should apply for the post of Poet Laureate for Model Railways!

 

Your posts are full of evocative statements going well beyond the normal confines us mere mortals use to describe our obsession. A Zephyr to me has always been an old Vauxhall car (I know where the word comes from)! So yes, as you said in post # 10144, it must be the heat out there in the colonies!

 

It'll be nice to see Owen Glendower weathered.

 

Jeff

Tutt - tutt Jeff the heat is getting to you me thinks.

 

A Zephyr was a Ford ,I had both the MkIII and MKIV versions and both earned the title of Dagenham Dustbins and rightly so going on my two!

 

Also the baseboard access photos were of a job we done and not of Dent. From top to bottom levels on Dent the distance is approx. 500mm

[60091]

Hello Jeff

 

Was going to post some thoughts on the recent track plans. The problem is, there's too much to remember!

I definitely think Andrew is correct to call it a stream and not a river. Under most of those impressive S&C viaducts are small streams. Given a few tens of thousands of years they've created the valleys which the MR needed to cross. 

 

I prefer one stream rather than two separate sections and, given it's small size, you could possibly extend it to run down from the fellside (from more towards the lower left in your diagram) You might even be able to work in a couple of small waterfalls.

 

I agree with Jason that it's better to loose the 2nd viaduct because of height problems. There are plenty of attractive bridges as a alternative and as a contrast to the viaduct. A bridge could be as low as 4"-4 1/2" that's about xx.xcm in your measurements   The tree lined cutting is a nice idea, making a change from the usual overbridge/tunnel entrance to a fiddle yard. I assume the reason it's not used more often is having to make all the trees required. The visual deception would be to create the impression that the NER branch continued off the end of the base board rather than taking a sharp turn into the fiddle yard.

 

I've been given the green diesels to play with on S&C 79-83.... apart from the Peak which has been taken for track testing on its owners new layout.

I'll post a few photos later.

 

Alan