Traeth Mawr -Painting Season, (mostly)

[ChrisN]

I seem to remember that the sleeper spacing was reduced as the engines increased in weight. This cause problems with interlaced timbers as the spacing reduced there was insufficient space to interlace the timbers and have enought ballast to make it stable. When they moved from interlaced to longer timbers replacing them they started to get problems some chairs being on a skew so they needed to increase the width of the timbers this was also affected by the bigger chairs for heavier rail. There was a lot of development of PW around the turn of the century through to the grouping. Probably didn't affect the cambrian much though. It's track was mostly light and so were the engines. 

If I were intending to use Peco I would definitely go for code 75 I know code 100 can look reasonable when ballasted and painted but code 75 with wider sleeper spacing would look much lighter and more suitable in my opinion.

 

Don

 

Don,

It is quite interesting that the track in the picture looks to me like flat bottomed so I could have used anything.  I chose Peco as most of what I am doing is new to me, plus I have very old stock which will be drafted into service when the layout is being used as 'Grand dad's railway' which is why I went with code 100.  It as taken me nearly 18 months to get this far although the ironic thing is that the reason I have not had the time is that we have been looking after the grand children more often.

[corneliuslundie]

Point timbers were generally wider, 10in by 5in rather than 8in.by 4in. Interestingly, the Taff Vale which had very heavy mineral traffic sometimes used 10in sleepers for plain line even back in the 19th century.

 

I didn't realise the Cambrian used FB track. I would use Peco too if I were you, and I understand why you need to stick with code 100, though for the 19th century it really should be about code 55 (75lb rail or thereabouts).

 

I need to build code 55 FB track for the Rhymney and I am not at all sure how I am going to do it. I think it is going to have to have the rails stuck to the sleepers and then "spikes" (not really but you will know what I mean) added as cosmetic bits. It will be very laborious so it is a good job I am not modelling a four track main line. I once tried building FB track using spikes meant for 4mm narrow gauge. I gave up after about a foot, which took all evening.

 

On another matter in Turton volume 13 it says that Madeley Colliery near Stoke on Trent sold gas coal to Cheshire and North Wales gas works and that transfers are available from Powsides.

 

Jonathan

[ChrisN]

Point timbers were generally wider, 10in by 5in rather than 8in.by 4in. Interestingly, the Taff Vale which had very heavy mineral traffic sometimes used 10in sleepers for plain line even back in the 19th century.

 

I didn't realise the Cambrian used FB track. I would use Peco too if I were you, and I understand why you need to stick with code 100, though for the 19th century it really should be about code 55 (75lb rail or thereabouts).

 

I need to build code 55 FB track for the Rhymney and I am not at all sure how I am going to do it. I think it is going to have to have the rails stuck to the sleepers and then "spikes" (not really but you will know what I mean) added as cosmetic bits. It will be very laborious so it is a good job I am not modelling a four track main line. I once tried building FB track using spikes meant for 4mm narrow gauge. I gave up after about a foot, which took all evening.

 

On another matter in Turton volume 13 it says that Madeley Colliery near Stoke on Trent sold gas coal to Cheshire and North Wales gas works and that transfers are available from Powsides.

 

Jonathan

 

Jonathan,

Thank you.  The track in the photo appears to be flat bottomed and I am sure that is what I read as well.  I am almost definitely sure that is what they started with anyway.  If you use code 55 will the wheel flanges be too big, and if so what will you do?

 

I had a friend who lived in Madeley.  I will check out the sides and see what there is.  I will probably need wagon diagrams as well.

[BG John]

I need to build code 55 FB track for the Rhymney and I am not at all sure how I am going to do it. I think it is going to have to have the rails stuck to the sleepers and then "spikes" (not really but you will know what I mean) added as cosmetic bits. It will be very laborious so it is a good job I am not modelling a four track main line. I once tried building FB track using spikes meant for 4mm narrow gauge. I gave up after about a foot, which took all evening.

Some track was ballasted over the sleepers, so missing spikes, or even chairs, is not so obvious. This is a not very good photo of my efforts at flat bottom rail spiked to sleepers, and I don't think the lack of spikes stood out like too much of a sore thumb! It hides the copper clad sleepers too. I'd certainly prefer it to Peco Code 75 track, although I used Peco Code 75 FB rail. The big question is how the Cambrian did their ballasting, to see if you could get away with it.

 

[Penlan]

The late Mike Morton-Lloyds 7mm model 'Llangynog'/'Tafolog', had FB rail soldered directly to plain copper clad sleepers, it was not evident that the spikes are not visible (missing) - As will be known, the Cambrian Rlys was Mike's speciality and he did a lot of research before building the layout.

The 1:1 scale GWR replaced the FB rails with chaired track in the 1920's - Tanat Valley line.

The Cambrian Rlys of course had proper chaired track on it's main routes.

 

Looking at the photo's of the Rhymney Rly's 1904 accident at Brithdir, there is little evidence (if any) of visible spikes to the FB track, and the sleeper spacing seems wide too.

 

corneliuslundie, if you know the photo(s), the brake down van has a interesting roof light, like a long cloche.

Edited May 8, 2015 by Penlan

[ChrisN]

Some track was ballasted over the sleepers, so missing spikes, or even chairs, is not so obvious. This is a not very good photo of my efforts at flat bottom rail spiked to sleepers, and I don't think the lack of spikes stood out like too much of a sore thumb! It hides the copper clad sleepers too. I'd certainly prefer it to Peco Code 75 track, although I used Peco Code 75 FB rail. The big question is how the Cambrian did their ballasting, to see if you could get away with it.

 

P00894.JPG

 

John,

Thank you.  The Cambrian before 1890 ballasted over the sleepers in stations.  They stopped the practise as it rotted the sleepers.  I seem to remember that it was a Board of Trade directive so I will have to show the sleepers.

[ChrisN]

The late Mike Morton-Lloyds 7mm model 'Llangynog'/'Tafolog', had FB rail soldered directly to plain copper clad sleepers, it was not evident that the spikes are not visible (missing) - As will be known, the Cambrian Rlys was Mike's speciality and he did a lot of research before building the layout.

The 1:1 scale GWR replaced the FB rails with chaired track in the 1920's - Tanat Valley line.

The Cambrian Rlys of course had proper chaired track on it's main routes.

 

Looking at the photo's of the Rhymney Rly's 1904 accident at Brithdir, there is little evidence (if any) of visible spikes to the FB track, and the sleeper spacing seems wide too.

 

corneliuslundie, if you know the photo(s), the brake down van has a interesting roof light, like a long cloche.

 

Penlan,

I am not sure what to make of your post in the early hours, was it 'cannot sleep until I have read the last exciting instalment', or 'I know, Traeth Mawr will put me to sleep'. 

 

I will have to go back and look at Cambrian sidings but I do not think that my track will be different, except perhaps for the ballasting.

[Penlan]

Cannot sleep....  I think I may not only be cross eyed, but cross referencing as well... These new tablets are !!!!!!
Reading up about Mike Morton-Lloyd's layout 'Tafolog', (MRJ No. 3 - Autumn 1985), he has a Powell Dyffryn coal wagon supplying 'Steam Coal' for the local quarry, other domestic coals where delivered in 'Ruabon' and local merchants wagons (Robert Pugh).
I knew the layout well and operated it a few times too, but details now ellude me.
Mike was a founder member of the Welsh Railways Research Circle (I joined at the 3rd meeting), he also worked very closely with C.C.Green on Cambrian matters.  I know he had original Cambrian coach paint in a tin (or two) and these are now safely held by a mutual friend.

[ChrisN]

Cannot sleep....  I think I may not only be cross eyed, but cross referencing as well... These new tablets are !!!!!!

Reading up about Mike Morton-Lloyd's layout 'Tafolog', (MRJ No. 3 - Autumn 1985), he has a Powell Dyffryn coal wagon supplying 'Steam Coal' for the local quarry, other domestic coals where delivered in 'Ruabon' and local merchants wagons (Robert Pugh).

I knew the layout well and operated it a few times too, but details now ellude me.

Mike was a founder member of the Welsh Railways Research Circle (I joined at the 3rd meeting), he also worked very closely with C.C.Green on Cambrian matters.  I know he had original Cambrian coach paint in a tin (or two) and these are now safely held by a mutual friend.

 

Penlan,

Thank you for the information.  I  hope your sleep gets sorted soon.  I know that unless I am exhausted when I go to bed I will spend a couple of hours each night awake.  I then get so tired I will sleep all through for a couple of nights.

[mike morley]

Re the flat-bottomed/bullhead thing, a lot of the minor branches all over Britain started off with cheap-and-cheerful flimsy, flatbottomed rail spiked directly to the sleepers and, if they lasted long enough, subsequently upgraded to "proper" bullheaded track.  The Dinas Mawddwy branch is a good example of this.

However, some branches - the Tanat Valley being the best example - had an intermediate stage where the where the main running lines and any passing loops were laid with chaired, bullheaded track while the sidings retained the spiked, flat-bottomed track.  I'm not 100% certain, but I think the Tanat Valley spent the longest period of it's working life in that intermediate stage.

 

I'm rubbish at building pointwork - I can just about scrape through with copperclad but C&L causes me serious grief and lots of rejects - so I set Pentrefan as an "intemediate" branch because it meant I only had to build one C&L point with the other two being Peco Code 60 (Z Gauge) rail on copperclad sleepers.  A sector plate dealt with the rest of the pointwork!

For my next project I've obtained some 2mm Society Code40 bullhead rail in the hope of reproducing the lightweight chaired track that a lot of the lesser lines had.  I've not yet put it to the test to confirm it but my initial impression is that it will be too flimsy, with the C&L chairs grip on the rail being so slight that track cleaning, for instance, would be impossible.

 

Jamie B, a fellow Cambrian modeller and former member of RMweb, did some experimenting with Peco Streamline sleeper spacing and the results were amazing, even with Code100!

[ChrisN]

Re the flat-bottomed/bullhead thing, a lot of the minor branches all over Britain started off with cheap-and-cheerful flimsy, flatbottomed rail spiked directly to the sleepers and, if they lasted long enough, subsequently upgraded to "proper" bullheaded track.  The Dinas Mawddwy branch is a good example of this.

However, some branches - the Tanat Valley being the best example - had an intermediate stage where the where the main running lines and any passing loops were laid with chaired, bullheaded track while the sidings retained the spiked, flat-bottomed track.  I'm not 100% certain, but I think the Tanat Valley spent the longest period of it's working life in that intermediate stage.

 

I'm rubbish at building pointwork - I can just about scrape through with copperclad but C&L causes me serious grief and lots of rejects - so I set Pentrefan as an "intemediate" branch because it meant I only had to build one C&L point with the other two being Peco Code 60 (Z Gauge) rail on copperclad sleepers.  A sector plate dealt with the rest of the pointwork!

For my next project I've obtained some 2mm Society Code40 bullhead rail in the hope of reproducing the lightweight chaired track that a lot of the lesser lines had.  I've not yet put it to the test to confirm it but my initial impression is that it will be too flimsy, with the C&L chairs grip on the rail being so slight that track cleaning, for instance, would be impossible.

 

Jamie B, a fellow Cambrian modeller and former member of RMweb, did some experimenting with Peco Streamline sleeper spacing and the results were amazing, even with Code100!

 

Mike,

Very interesting.  I am sure the picture I put a link up to has flat bottomed rail.  I have to see what I can achieve, although I will not ballast until I know it is working well electrically.

[Donw]

Re the flat-bottomed/bullhead thing, a lot of the minor branches all over Britain started off with cheap-and-cheerful flimsy, flatbottomed rail spiked directly to the sleepers and, if they lasted long enough, subsequently upgraded to "proper" bullheaded track.  The Dinas Mawddwy branch is a good example of this.

However, some branches - the Tanat Valley being the best example - had an intermediate stage where the where the main running lines and any passing loops were laid with chaired, bullheaded track while the sidings retained the spiked, flat-bottomed track.  I'm not 100% certain, but I think the Tanat Valley spent the longest period of it's working life in that intermediate stage.

 

I'm rubbish at building pointwork - I can just about scrape through with copperclad but C&L causes me serious grief and lots of rejects - so I set Pentrefan as an "intemediate" branch because it meant I only had to build one C&L point with the other two being Peco Code 60 (Z Gauge) rail on copperclad sleepers.  A sector plate dealt with the rest of the pointwork!

For my next project I've obtained some 2mm Society Code40 bullhead rail in the hope of reproducing the lightweight chaired track that a lot of the lesser lines had.  I've not yet put it to the test to confirm it but my initial impression is that it will be too flimsy, with the C&L chairs grip on the rail being so slight that track cleaning, for instance, would be impossible.

 

Jamie B, a fellow Cambrian modeller and former member of RMweb, did some experimenting with Peco Streamline sleeper spacing and the results were amazing, even with Code100!

 

Mike are you using the C+L chairs if so they will not grip the 2mm rail . The 2mm rail is fine with the 2mm assocition chairs but they are rather small so may not look right

This is some 2mm scale track using the components. The copperclad sleepers were to add strength I dont think they are needed if the crossing is held together with pieces of scrap etch.

 

Don

[mike morley]

Prompted by both my own and Don's comments I had another look at the 2mmFS rail, couldnt find the test piece I made originally so started another.

 

I suspect most people buy C&L track as ready-made flexi track.  I use EMGS rail so buy C&L trackbases and thread them on - a laborious job, on a par with ballasting for boredom levels.  Anyone who has done the same will be aware that C&L's trackbases are slightly - and the word slightly has to be emphasised - inconsistent in nature and that while some will thread on quite easily, others will be right pigs and will fight you every inch of the way.

I reckon the original test piece I made used the "easy" bases and, as previously stated, they didnt grip the rail too well.  This time I began with the other type and their grip on the 2mm rail was perfectly acceptable.  The resulting track was obviously more delicate than normal 4mm scale flexitrack and cleaning it would certainly call for some care, but it would not be the impossible task I originally predicted.

 

Now for the bad news. 

Encouraged by that, I put together two-thirds of a length (stopping when I found I'd only got "easy" bases left) put a wagon on the track and . . .

Ah!  The flanges give each chair a gentle kiss.

You might be able to get away with in 18.83, thanks Scalefour's finer flanges, but in 18.2 or 16.5 the combination of 2mmFS rail and C&L bases is a non-starter.

 

With regard to using 2mmFS rail and chairs, I agree with Don and do not think it would look right.

 

 

EMGS rail in the background, 2mmFS rail in the foreground

Edited May 9, 2015 by mike morley

[Donw]

The 2mm rail looks rather light for 4mm even by Cambrian standards. The 3mm boys do have some code 60 bullhead try 3smr.co.uk sadly no chairs seem to be available

Don

 

 

edit it is under 14.2mm handbuilt

Edited May 9, 2015 by Donw

[mike morley]

It doesnt look quite as emaciated in real life as it does in the picture, but I know what you mean.

As it happens, while I was threading it I was wondering what 3mm scale rail was available!

I let my 3mm Society membership lapse.  It might be time to consider re-joining . . .

[ChrisN]

It doesnt look quite as emaciated in real life as it does in the picture, but I know what you mean.

As it happens, while I was threading it I was wondering what 3mm scale rail was available!

I let my 3mm Society membership lapse.  It might be time to consider re-joining . . .

 

Mike,

I did wonder with your original post if you would have trouble with wheel flanges.  I assume the only way round it would be to file each one down individually after having set it up in a drill so it would rotate.

[mike morley]

Hmm . . .

That might work, but I wouldnt be at all surprised if it caused more problems than it solved.  I think it would also be a case of tackling the symptoms, rather than the ailment.

I'd say the better route would be to explore the potential of Don's suggestion re the 3mm rail.

[ChrisN]

Hmm . . .

That might work, but I wouldnt be at all surprised if it caused more problems than it solved.  I think it would also be a case of tackling the symptoms, rather than the ailment.

I'd say the better route would be to explore the potential of Don's suggestion re the 3mm rail.

 

Mike,

I find it interesting that I left the 3mm Society as the only way forward was to build my own stock, mostly out of brass and there was not much of that then. I moved to 009 where........ I had to build my own stock, but at least there are n gauge chassis and the kits are whitemetal and plastic.  This brought me to modelling Victorian railways and the local one was the Cambrian.  So I am back to having to build my own stock again.

[Donw]

Mike,

I find it interesting that I left the 3mm Society as the only way forward was to build my own stock, mostly out of brass and there was not much of that then. I moved to 009 where........ I had to build my own stock, but at least there are n gauge chassis and the kits are whitemetal and plastic.  This brought me to modelling Victorian railways and the local one was the Cambrian.  So I am back to having to build my own stock again.

 

You know you want to do it.

 

Don

[ChrisN]

You know you want to do it.

 

Don

 

Don,

It is funny because when they announced that there would be R-T-R 009 I thought, 'Why would you want that, it takes the fun out of building it'.  The issue I have is that my skill level is at plastic and whitemetal, and I am happy using R-T-R chassis so it is locos and brass coaches that I have not yet mastered.

 

I will be at Expo EM South next week so I shall be looking out for a simple kit to learn soldering on.

[mike morley]

 

I will be at Expo EM South next week so I shall be looking out for a simple kit to learn soldering on.

 

ABS kits are amongst the best, IMHO.

 

 

These two are both from ABS.  The one on the right is as designed, the one on the left is the same kit altered to represent the ex-Helston road van that ended up on the Kerry branch.  The kit might have been designed with the conversion in mind and makes it what must be one of the easiest kit-bashes on the planet.

The Barry Railway iron mink that appears in almost every photograph ever taken of Pentrefan is also an ABS kit and there are many more in the range that would be appropriate.

 

Also recommended are 5&9 kits (Although they won't be at ExpoEM)  They arent quite as sophisticated as ABS kits, although they don't lag all that far behind, and they are such remarkably good value for money that making a complete hash of one won't cause a financial crisis.  The danger is that you might find yourself in the same position I have in that you find yourself liking them so much you end up with rather more LBSCR wagons on your layout than is plausable on a layout set in Mid Wales!  I got around that problem by converting a Stroudley open to a Welshpool-based private owner wagon and using the body of a Craven covered van as the extension of the goods shed.

[Donw]

Sometimes you can buy scraps of brass cut off from the etches at shows( my last lot came from Worsley Works). If you try soldering up some bits from them you will not waste a good kit for your initial practice.

Don

[ChrisN]

ABS kits are amongst the best, IMHO.

 

108_2588.jpg

 

These two are both from ABS.  The one on the right is as designed, the one on the left is the same kit altered to represent the ex-Helston road van that ended up on the Kerry branch.  The kit might have been designed with the conversion in mind and makes it what must be one of the easiest kit-bashes on the planet.

The Barry Railway iron mink that appears in almost every photograph ever taken of Pentrefan is also an ABS kit and there are many more in the range that would be appropriate.

 

Also recommended are 5&9 kits (Although they won't be at ExpoEM)  They arent quite as sophisticated as ABS kits, although they don't lag all that far behind, and they are such remarkably good value for money that making a complete hash of one won't cause a financial crisis.  The danger is that you might find yourself in the same position I have in that you find yourself liking them so much you end up with rather more LBSCR wagons on your layout than is plausable on a layout set in Mid Wales!  I got around that problem by converting a Stroudley open to a Welshpool-based private owner wagon and using the body of a Craven covered van as the extension of the goods shed.

 

Mike,

Thank you.  I will have a look through the ABS range.  I am keeping an eye out for 5&9 wagons as at least one will end up on the layout.  At the moment he is selling mid-Victorian figures which are, and I cannot say this very often, are too early for me.

[ChrisN]

Sometimes you can buy scraps of brass cut off from the etches at shows( my last lot came from Worsley Works). If you try soldering up some bits from them you will not waste a good kit for your initial practice.

Don

 

Don,

Thank you I will see what I can get.  I would also like a kit as well so that I can have more practise bending the brass.  I have done it before with Shire Scenes coach sides but a refresher would not go amiss.

[corneliuslundie]

Yes, get ABS/Fourmost kits at Expo EM while you can. He very rarely attends shows, has no website of e-mail address and no other traders seems to stock them these days. Lots of useful wagons and usually easy to make and pretty accurate.

 

I also rate 51L kits along with David Geen's (soke of the ex Great Western Wagons). And watch out for remainders of some of the cast wagon kits by Woodham Wagon Works and 5 & 9 Models, neither of which seem to be easily available now but whose range includes some delightful, quirky little dumb buffered coal wagons ideal for a coal merchant in 1895.

 

I have one of the ABS GWR brake vans already built. I must see what is needed to convert it to the one that ran on the Kerry branch - essential really for Sarn. (By the way, just to confuse things I discovered reading "Rails to Talerddig" that Carno was original,ly called Sarn.

 

Jonathan