Mid-Cornwall Lines - 1950s Western Region in 00

[drduncan]

Could they work back as pilot engines on another 3 services?

Duncan

[St Enodoc]

Thanks chaps.

 

10 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

 

Not sure I’d qualify for membership of the brains trust, but if I’m following this correctly I think you’re telling us the rules did allow for two light engines to travel coupled together (?).  If so, would scheduling an additional double movement be possible, just leaving one loose end?  Just a thought, Keith.

 

 

That's exactly right, Keith. There are a number of "double light engine movements" in the sequence. These last few have emerged during initial running, due to changes in some train formations - the rule on the MCL is that main line trains of more than 8 and branch trains of more than 3 coaches must be double-headed, due to the gradients. Of course, some other branch trains are double-headed to save paths, particularly on Saturday.  I've exhausted all these possibilities except for the last few outliers. I could schedule these but it would be a real (I mean REAL) pain having to rework the sequence and everything that flows from it.

 

9 hours ago, drduncan said:

Could they work back as pilot engines on another 3 services?

Duncan

 

I've done that to save paths in some cases but I've ended up with just these last few that I can't make work that way.

 

The question at hand is how to deal with the last few instances, whether by changing the rule, by adding ad-hoc "ghost" paths or some other way.

[16Brunel]

It's your model railway, so Rule #1 applies - save your sanity and just Peco Loco-Lift 'em.

 

Hat, coat, ...

 

- Scott

[Oldddudders]

2 hours ago, 16Brunel said:

It's your model railway, so Rule #1 applies - save your sanity and just Peco Loco-Lift 'em.

The barbarians are truly at the gates!

[Keith Addenbrooke]

7 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Thanks chaps.

 

 

That's exactly right, Keith. There are a number of "double light engine movements" in the sequence. These last few have emerged during initial running, due to changes in some train formations - the rule on the MCL is that main line trains of more than 8 and branch trains of more than 3 coaches must be double-headed, due to the gradients. Of course, some other branch trains are double-headed to save paths, particularly on Saturday.  I've exhausted all these possibilities except for the last few outliers. I could schedule these but it would be a real (I mean REAL) pain having to rework the sequence and everything that flows from it.

 

 

I've done that to save paths in some cases but I've ended up with just these last few that I can't make work that way.

 

The question at hand is how to deal with the last few instances, whether by changing the rule, by adding ad-hoc "ghost" paths or some other way.

 

As an aside (that is, a comment which may be of some interest to a few, but not much help, sorry ) I wondered how the American Railroads of the period might manage this kind of situation (where helper / pusher locomotives were also common, so might also need to return light for their next run).  While I think they could have run as ‘Extras’ or even sometimes ‘Second Sections’ of existing trains (as long as the First Section showed appropriate flags and, in either case, the necessary train orders were issued to all opposing trains), the problem there was that running a light engine as a train required a crew of three (Engineer, Fireman and Conductor), while double-heading, where possible, only needs the two engine crew.  So it would still be a problem.

 

I’m afraid the lesson for us all when thinking about operations is that leaving seemingly small details such as this to one side when developing the schedule (per @St Enodoc’s earlier post on this) can have ramifications later - not to sound like a ‘know-all’, simply to help us learn.  I wonder what others will suggest over the weekend?  Keith.

 

[St Enodoc]

Australia v Wales in Sydney tonight. Two fairly ordinary-looking teams, each trying to outdo the other in mediocrity until a brilliant solo try after an hour put a spark of life into the game. With no further scores, the winners deserved their victory in the end.

Edited July 6 by St Enodoc

[Barry O]

I watched the all blacks v England..  apparently its fine to stand beside the middle of a ruck and act as a human blocker..

 

Baz

[Clive Mortimore]

15 hours ago, 16Brunel said:

It's your model railway, so Rule #1 applies - save your sanity and just Peco Loco-Lift 'em.

 

Hat, coat, ...

 

- Scott

Hi Scott

 

So what is wrong with the hand of (insert your own imaginary friend's name) in shifting a loco.....................Loco lift shear luxury.

 

12 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

The barbarians are truly at the gates!

Yo Dudders

 

As I have already stated .....................Loco lift shear luxury.

 

Quote

It would also involve drivers having to operate DCC consists of three locos, not just two, which I'd rather not impose on them.

Dear Mr Sainty

 

Now had you not been fooled by this only two wires gimmick you could easily couple up three locomotives and run them together without having to have operators with a degree in computer software manipulation. 

 

See simple solutions to complicated questions or is it complicated solutions to simple questions, I never know with model railways.

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Now had you not been fooled by this only two wires gimmick you could easily couple up three locomotives and run them together without having to have operators with a degree in computer software manipulation. 

Wot? Three separate track sections, each one loco long? That's at least four wires for a start!

[St Enodoc]

Back to light engines. I had another play with the sequence today and found that, with just one exception, I could get all the light engines to or from where they needed to be without having to couple more than two together. In a couple of cases, this involved double-heading a train rather than running light. In the end, this was a good outcome.

 

Fortunately, the exception was near the end of the Friday part of the sequence, where there is a break in the numbering, so I was able to add a new train, 147, to get loco 7715 safely back from Porthmellyn Road to St Blazey.

 

Thanks to Keith M, Keith A, Duncan, Scott and Clive for your suggestions, wherever they fell on the spectrum of helpfulness!

[St Enodoc]

Starting to look forward to our next running session in two weeks' time, the first since March because of my UK trip in May.

 

To run the sequence in its full form at all needs at least 8 operators. To run it without any ad-hockery needs 12. At the moment we have 10 confirmed, so the session will indeed be viable. Good news!

[16Brunel]

12 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

 

So what is wrong with the hand of (insert your own imaginary friend's name) in shifting a loco.....................Loco lift shear luxury.

 

Clive,

 

Loco-Lift: I was going for something maybe 1 step more formal than bare hands.  I don't have a Lift, but my stuff is N-gauge, so even a tender loco is a one-hand job to move (just a pain to try to get all the wheels back on the rails at once!).

Imaginary friend: maybe Anoia?  But then she seems to always leave the loco you need buried at the far end of a dead-end siding...

Shear luxury: a band-new, up-market full set of tin snips.

 

- Scott

[St Enodoc]

21 minutes ago, 16Brunel said:

 

Clive,

 

Loco-Lift: I was going for something maybe 1 step more formal than bare hands.  I don't have a Lift, but my stuff is N-gauge, so even a tender loco is a one-hand job to move (just a pain to try to get all the wheels back on the rails at once!).

Imaginary friend: maybe Anoia?  But then she seems to always leave the loco you need buried at the far end of a dead-end siding...

Shear luxury: a band-new, up-market full set of tin snips.

 

- Scott

Putting my serious head on, I have got a loco-lift which works well on Peco track but on SMP track the chairs stop the copper strips contacting the rails properly, so I don't really use it much.

[Tim Dubya]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Putting my serious head on, I have got a loco-lift which works well on Peco track but on SMP track the chairs stop the copper strips contacting the rails properly, so I don't really use it much.

 

Do you think it could be adapted without major surgery or is it a lost cause?

I don't have one but it's on my list of ponderances 🤔

 

 

Edited July 7 by Tim Dubya

[St Enodoc]

8 hours ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

Do you think it could be adapted without major surgery or is it a lost cause?

I don't have one but it's on my list of ponderances 🤔

 

 

I don't think you'd get it to work reliably on SMP track, Tim, even with modifications. It's fine on Peco code 75FB, so presumably also on other Peco codes too. I haven't got any other types of track to try it on.

 

To be clear, this applies both to the old soft foam-sided version and the new rigid plastic version.

[37Oban]

16 hours ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

Do you think it could be adapted without major surgery or is it a lost cause?

I don't have one but it's on my list of ponderances 🤔

 

 

Hi,

wouldn't it be possible to build a custom lift suitable for your track?  Shouldn't be too difficult using placticard and/or thin plywood, some copper strip and some spare track?  Be cheaper too!

 

Roja

[Tim Dubya]

1 hour ago, 37Oban said:

Hi,

wouldn't it be possible to build a custom lift suitable for your track?  Shouldn't be too difficult using placticard and/or thin plywood, some copper strip and some spare track?  Be cheaper too!

 

Roja

 

Oh yes, but I like to ponder (or procrastinate).  I haven't decided what I'm doing for the fiddle yard yet, all 3' x 18" of it.

[KeithMacdonald]

On 05/07/2024 at 14:05, St Enodoc said:

which solution should I adopt or are there even others that I haven't spotted?

 

I offer you the "other-scone" approach.

Or how they deal with that situation in Devon.

4-up 37s at Crediton.

 

 

 

[Oldddudders]

That pic may induce over-excitement among some readers!

[Dunsignalling]

 

I've seen a US video of a balancing engine move with no fewer than 13 locos coupled together!

 

[St Enodoc]

3 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

I offer you the "other-scone" approach.

Or how they deal with that situation in Devon.

4-up 37s at Crediton.

 

 

 

That's the Suvvern, innit! Doesn't count.

[16Brunel]

19 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

I offer you the "other-scone" approach.

Or how they deal with that situation in Devon.

4-up 37s at Crediton.

 

 

 

Looks so... American...

[St Enodoc]

Some bits-and-pieces before our next running session on Saturday week.

 

Yesterday, I repaired Porthmellyn Road 11 disc, as the main part of the signal had broken in two. A few dollops of MEK fixed that. It took a bit longer to adjust the position of the disc itself to correspond with the position of the actuator - this being one of the design flaws with the memory-wire system that I've still to address properly.

 

Over the past few days, I've amended all the operators' paperwork for the next running session. This includes new sequence sheets to correspond with the latest updates, covering the recent light engine saga; the revised procedure for the short china-clay trains; and some additions/deletions/corrections arising from our experience of running the full sequence so far. Of course, I've added the new train 147 to the PowerPoint file for the train describer too.

 

I added a couple of offcuts of MDF to the temporary facia where the branch from Treloggan Junction approaches St Enodoc Down end, to give greater protection to St Enodoc 3 and 28 signals, which are rather close to the baseboard edge and so are vulnerable to stray elbows or hand-held throttles. There were a couple of near misses last time. In the longer run I need to think of something better - perspex is the most likely outcome.

 

 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

Australia - Wales, in the Melbourne rain, was a much more enjoyable game to watch than last week's. In fact, it was almost a thriller. Both sides played adventurously, and between them scored 64 points, but in the end the winners were those whose took better advantage of their opponents' mistakes.

Edited July 13 by St Enodoc
grammar and punctuation

[St Enodoc]

We had an excellent running session today. A team of 13 meant that every operating role was covered and things progressed well. Only one error in the sequence sheets showed up, namely a main line train missing from the Paddington sheet. I've fixed that now for next time.

 

We got through 29 trains in just over two hours. These included a mixture of main line passenger, parcels and freight trains (including a couple that were put inside on the Down Goods Loop), branch and Polperran line passenger and freight trains, long and short clay trains and the railbus, so a bit of everything. We even shunted coaches from Pentowan on to an Up main line passenger train at Porthmellyn Road for the first time. If we can keep up the rate from the last three sessions, we might get through the complete sequence by the end of next year.

 

Once we've had a couple more sessions and got a bit slicker, I'll ask Charles to make another video, concentrating on the branch and Polperran line workings this time.