!!

Not Registered?

Welcome!  Please register to view all of the new posts and forum boards - some of which are hidden to guests.  After registering and gaining 10 posts you will be able to sell and buy items on our N'porium.

If you have any problems registering, then please check your spam filter before emailing us.  Hotmail users seem to find their emails in the Junk folder.


Thanks for reading,
The NGF Staff.

Author Topic: The Coniston Railway  (Read 20481 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #690 on: July 30, 2020, 12:16:35 PM »
Would it be possible / was it the done thing for the Jubilee or Black 5 to couple onto the front of another train to pilot through to Coniston as a positioning move?

Could be, although I'd have to "invent" even more traffic than the line would normally have had.

Having given it a tad more thought, there's an extremely good reason why it wouldn't be possible. They have no front couplings, nor the means of fitting them.

Light engine movements it'll have to be.

Offline Black Sheep

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 557
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #691 on: July 30, 2020, 12:19:12 PM »
Am I wrong in thinking Coniston had a turntable?

Had it gone by that point, or was it only large enough to turn Copperknob round on and thus too short for a Black 5 even if it didn't have tender attached (not that they'd disconnect just to turn a loco round at a station)

Online crewearpley40

  • Larger Gallery
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7095
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #692 on: July 30, 2020, 12:28:16 PM »
Always think the best layouts involve someone with a love and knowledge of history and the line engaging with the viewing enthusiasts and public freeing you to maintain an eye on other members operating

Indeed this topic (and layout) has me wishing I'd built Lakeside pre war, ah well.
  Nothing to stop you. Good luck if you do

Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #693 on: July 30, 2020, 12:28:56 PM »
Am I wrong in thinking Coniston had a turntable?

Had it gone by that point, or was it only large enough to turn Copperknob round on and thus too short for a Black 5 even if it didn't have tender attached (not that they'd disconnect just to turn a loco round at a station)

No, you're not wrong - but it was only a 42' one, the same size IIRC as at Lakeside. In the early days the turntable was the only way of getting a loco into the shed. The separate spur off the runround loop behind the signal box to the shed wasn't added until later. I think that was at the time the third platform was added, so late 1890s.

They certainly wouldn't detach a tender for turning - that would require lifting the cab and/or tender floor in order to access the rather large, 4-6" diameter, pins and possibly needing to compress a large spring too. Assuming suitable facilities, by the time they'd done that, turned both the loco and tender and put 'em back together again they could have gone round to Millom for turning and returned - probably twice  ;)


Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #694 on: July 30, 2020, 12:58:11 PM »
No, you're not wrong - but it was only a 42' one, the same size IIRC as at Lakeside. In the early days the turntable was the only way of getting a loco into the shed.

There is a reference in one of the books about the Coniston Railway that Colonel Yolland, of the Railways Inspectorate, would only allow the railway to open on the proviso that they only used tank engines until the turntable was installed.

Offline Black Sheep

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 557
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #695 on: July 30, 2020, 03:56:20 PM »
Am I wrong in thinking Coniston had a turntable?

Had it gone by that point, or was it only large enough to turn Copperknob round on and thus too short for a Black 5 even if it didn't have tender attached (not that they'd disconnect just to turn a loco round at a station)

No, you're not wrong - but it was only a 42' one, the same size IIRC as at Lakeside. In the early days the turntable was the only way of getting a loco into the shed. The separate spur off the runround loop behind the signal box to the shed wasn't added until later. I think that was at the time the third platform was added, so late 1890s.

They certainly wouldn't detach a tender for turning - that would require lifting the cab and/or tender floor in order to access the rather large, 4-6" diameter, pins and possibly needing to compress a large spring too. Assuming suitable facilities, by the time they'd done that, turned both the loco and tender and put 'em back together again they could have gone round to Millom for turning and returned - probably twice  ;)

I wasn't sure how much of a job it was to separate loco and tender, but I figured it wasn't a line side job.

My plans for Lakeside are still missing in action so can't confirm the size of turntable (can't actually think where it was positioned on the site currently)

Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #696 on: July 30, 2020, 04:41:12 PM »
I wasn't sure how much of a job it was to separate loco and tender, but I figured it wasn't a line side job.

Probably not even a running shed job. If the drawgear needed attention I reckon it would be at least a main shed job.

Quote
My plans for Lakeside are still missing in action so can't confirm the size of turntable (can't actually think where it was positioned on the site currently)

The 1913 OS map at the link below indicates somewhere in the 40-45' range, so I suspect it was the same as at Coniston, 42'.

It was located on the far side of all the tracks from the lake, roughly in line with where the steamers' slipway entered the water.

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=19&lat=54.27673&lon=-2.95550&layers=168&b=1



Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #697 on: July 30, 2020, 08:52:06 PM »
Having got myself well and truly in a knot a few times yesterday sending passenger trains back and forth, occasionally trying to fit three into two platforms, I decided on a  change of tack this morning so I have mostly been shunting today , assessing the intended locos capabilities with my mixture of makes of wagons and my magnetic uncoupling system.
As I've mentioned on other threads, I'm using diddy neodymium magnets glued to the couplings, to be repelled by electromagnets buried under the track. All my locos are fitted with magnets and most of my Peco wagons but at one end only. Some are left without magnets to reduce the likelihood of trying to couple up two magnet-fitted couplings.
None of my Farish or Dapol wagons are fitted because the springs are strong enough that the magnet would lift the wagon instead of the coupling, I may revisit some of those at a later date with some weight added to the wagons.
None of the Minitrix and Lima wagons are fitted with magnets because the couplings are retained with steel keeper plates, which louse up the magnetic field. I'm not bothered about the Lima ones, all 2 of them, since one will be put on the dock road off the wagon turntables at Broughton - I may even butcher it to have open doors and glue it in place. I would like to attend to the Minitrix ones if I can, though, since they are all "Millom Co-Operative" so have a local connection. Some time I'll investigate the possibility of removing the keeper plate and replacing it with plastic. or, even, hacking the couplings off completely and replacing them with Peco Elsies.

The results of the shunting were largely as expected - the Peco ones performed admirably, whilst the others were great with the Jinty but a bit hit and miss with the 4F. Conclusion, more Peco ones needed  ;)

No problem, I've been acquiring various kits for that very purpose - some Peco and some from other manufacturers based on the Peco 10' chassis - and for learning how to use the airbrush before I dare trying it on anything more important/expensive. So, out came a batch of Peco 7-plank open wagons - which proved that I definitely need a lot more practice with the airbrush. It's fair to say that I definitely got paint on them, but equally fair to say that it's a good job I don't want 'em to look pristine anyway  :hmmm:

I certainly found the top coat went on easier than the primer - Humbrol No.1 acrylic primer followed by Humbrol No.40 acrylic gloss grey. When that's fully hardened, I'll apply some transfers then give them a coat of matt varnish - I hope. When I've assembled them and added the magnets they can go into service and I'll try the more complicated kits - ones that need the bodies building as opposed to being a single moulding.


Online crewearpley40

  • Larger Gallery
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7095
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #698 on: July 30, 2020, 08:55:43 PM »
Chris. Do you find peco couplings are more reliable ?

Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #699 on: July 30, 2020, 09:03:28 PM »
Chris. Do you find peco couplings are more reliable ?

In my, albeit limited, experience, yes. They couple up easier with less chance of shoving a wagon down the track instead of coupling up than the sprung ones and I don't have problems with unintentional uncoupling (*) now I've grown out of sending my trains around at 200mph  ;)

(*) certainly with the 10' wheelbase ones, I do have some 15' ones which occasionally let go on my tighter curves but not very often.

They are also by far the easiest for my magnetic uncoupling system, both to fit and to use.

Online crewearpley40

  • Larger Gallery
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7095
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #700 on: July 30, 2020, 09:07:44 PM »
Only reason I was asking if you have a mixture of stock peco  , farish and lima like I do, the peco seem to be more reliable chris with coupling up to peco only without my hand anywhere near

Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #701 on: July 30, 2020, 09:14:29 PM »
Only reason I was asking if you have a mixture of stock peco  , farish and lima like I do, the peco seem to be more reliable chris with coupling up to peco only without my hand anywhere near

I definitely find them better. The Farish, Lima, Dapol and Minitrix ones need a bit more of a shove to get the coupling to lift against the spring, although the Farish ones less so, with the chance of the coupling not lifting and the wagon being sent off down the siding on its own.

The Peco ones, however, need very little effort to get them coupled up - I can usually get them hooked up without the wagon moving at all.


Online crewearpley40

  • Larger Gallery
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7095
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #702 on: July 30, 2020, 09:17:53 PM »
Sometimes some stock work best with the loco allocated eg the excursion with the Jubilee, the Jinty with her wagons and like me the 20s remain with the coal, the 25s on their wagons or mk1s etc

Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #703 on: July 31, 2020, 06:43:04 AM »
Sometimes some stock work best with the loco allocated eg the excursion with the Jubilee, the Jinty with her wagons and like me the 20s remain with the coal, the 25s on their wagons or mk1s etc

Very true. My display setup, when allowed will generally be;

The Peco & Farish Jubilees on the Blackpool excursion comprising 5 Farish Stanier coaches. These run well and uncouple reliably at the north end of Coniston.

The Farish Fairburn tank on the "Barrow excursion" comprising 4 older Farish LMS mainline coaches. This works well, running smokebox towards Coniston, runs best into platform 1 and uncouples reliably. It also reverses back to Broughton reliably, run facing the other way the trailing bogie can be a bit wayward at times.

The Dapol Ivatt 2MT tank on the branch local, comprising one older Farish coach and a second modified as a driver trailer. This loco doesn't uncouple reliably and the trailing truck can be a bit wayward so having a coach attached keeps that under control whilst running as a push-pull overcomes the poor uncoupling.

The Farish (Poole) Black 5 can be used to ring the changes on the Blackpool excursion or pull a goods train up to Coniston, in both cases having to return light engine since it has no front coupling. Actually, the Black 5 is more prototypical for the excursion since that was what they generally used, there's only one instance I've found when a Jubilee was used and that was when it failed on another train but was deemed OK to run up to Coniston so the locos were swapped.

The Farish 4F can be used for goods, including shunting if Peco wagons are used. It's less good with the other brands, unless I do changes the couplings on the wagons.

The Jinty is for goods and can shunt any wagons.

If I want to ring the changes more, I have a Farish Crab which uncouples well at the rear and has no front coupling.

All my other locos need the couplings modifying to get them to work reliably, require other work or are on restricted running so they are in the "to do" list.



Offline chrism

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1639
  • Country: gb
  • The Coniston Railway
    • Awards
Re: The Coniston Railway
« Reply #704 on: August 02, 2020, 08:23:19 PM »
Well, that's improved the proportion of my stock that can be magnetically uncoupled.

3F No.7309 passes through Torver with an Up train of the kitbuilt wagons I've been working on this weekend;





Working back from the Jinty, we have;
Steel Highfit on Peco chassis, from NGS kit 47
Wooden Highfit on Peco chassis, from NGS kit 47
3-plank Medfit on Peco chassis, from Parkwood Models
Bogie Bolster D, from NGS wagon project no.8
LMS 27' Long Low, from CPF Plastic Models kit RC963
6 x Peco 7-plank wagons.
LMS Brake van, not from a kit just to complete the train.

All the kit-built wagons have suffered my first attempts at using an airbrush and refreshing my memory at applying transfers - they all have the LMS branding but no numbers nor capacity markings. My mincies just couldn't cope with those, the tiny LMS lettering on the Bogie Bolster D and 27' Long Low taxed them quite enough - even with two pairs of specs and a magnifying glass. It didn't help that the lettering transfers are white on a pale backing sheet and I was trying to put them on light grey painted surfaces :(

I've still to sort out loads for them, including something better than the Peco loads that are presently adorning the 7-plankers. The Bogie Bolster still needs the stanchions adding but I've decided to leave those until I've decided what load it will carry as that will dictate where the stanchions should be put.

All bar the Bogie Bolster have uncoupling magnets fitted, since they are either on Peco chassis kits or have Elsie style couplings. The Bogie Bolster doesn't have magnets since it's running on Farish bogies and, therefore, have Farish sprung couplings. I may try to add a magnet once I've got some weight added under the deck and a suitable load added - without those a magnet fitted coupling just throws the bogie off the rails, I know coz I tried ;-)

Just to round off a successful weekend's work, the Minitrix "Millom Co-operative" wagons in the goods yard can also be magnetically uncoupled now. I've removed the steel clips that retained the couplings in their mountings and replaced them with plasticard, so they don't mess up the magnetic field. I may need to do the other ends, which don't have magnets, as well if I have trouble uncoupling two of them from each other but I'll have a play first to see if it's necessary. They certainly uncouple from, say, a Peco wagon with no trouble.

Just for the hell of it, since I've enjoyed doing the kits and because I need more practice with the airbrush, I've ordered some more - a couple of Peco box vans, a couple of Peco 5-plank open wagons and another Bogie Bolster D.

I wonder what I'll be doing next weekend?  ;)

 

Please Support Us!
August Goal: £60.00
Due Date: Aug 31
Total Receipts: £60.00
Below Goal: £0.00
Site Currency: GBP
100% 
August Donations

anything
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal