Wiring frogs, avoiding a sticky mess

Don't as I did, try to solder a wire to the underside of a Peco point where the frog wires are. A sticky brown mess of melted sleepers is guaranteed unless you have the touch of a plastic surgeon. Clearly, I am not thus blessed.

In a response to a question posted on the Yahoo! N Gauge Forum, I was guided to the bleeding obvious (to the initiated) answer which is to solder the wire across the two protruding rails that form the frog. Much simpler and neater, though I've had to trim the insulating fishplates if the solder spreads too far along the rail. Anyway, success. And it only cost me one medium radius point, which may be salvageable...

Wiring frogs, or not

Lots of questions here. Firstly, is it necessary to wire the frog of a point? Shouldn't the frog polarity be switched by the switch rail? Well, yes it should. But it didn't in two out of six cases on my so-far laid track.

In a spectacular and unprecedented exercise in forward planning, I had wired the point frogs in advance, just in case. So it's a matter of wiring them to a switch activated by the point motor.

Hmmm. I had planned to use a micro switch to drive the LED indicators on my control panel. Now I need another switch to change frog polarity. Is there a switch that can do both jobs?

Yes there is. Peco's PL15 switch does just that. But at £5 a throw it's too expensive to consider, with all the points I'll be installing (50+) over time. There is a DPDT microswitch that may work - a DPDT switch is basically two single switches changed by the same mechanical device (in this case, the point motor). I've ordered one from Maplins to test it, and then will source a cheaper version if it works in principle. (Maplins are consistently more expensive that other online sources such as All Components and Rapid.)

Another mistake, or when not to use PVA

All the books, all of them, say to use PVA to stick down your track, if you're not using track pins (which IMHO) look ugly. So board one track was laid, wired and tested. Trains ran! To compete a circuit I temporarily pinned some rack to the rear of the board.

Then I noticed that when the loco ran over the temporary track it was nice and quiet, but the stuck down track was noticeably loud. Of course this is actually a well-known issue with PVA, as it sets solid and transmits sound. What to do? Start again by lifting the track, or soldier on?

In the end I decided that, at this relatively early stage, it's best to do it properly, so I've lifted all laid track (sob!) and am now sticking it down with Copydex, a Latex based flexible glue. Hopefully that will work more quietly.

GF Black 5 - 'Tis a thing of beauty

Just had a look at my new GF Black 5. Even with my rubbish photos the detail and quality are clear. What's interesting is the comparison with an old Black 5 - they actually look like the same engine, but with more detail applied to the new version (wire hand rails, see-through wheels, etc.). But the old one won't look out of place.

Up and Down

I’m not sure where the convention of naming travel in the direction of London as ‘Up’. Any ideas? But the convention has some odd consequences for the layout (and for the Beattock operational procedures).

Travelling from Beattock station to the Summit is northwards, away from London, and so in the Down direction. But of course we’re going ‘up’ the bank towards the Summit. This wouldn’t matter so much but for the habit of train crew to refer to ‘going up’ the bank*, meaning travelling in the Down direction from the station to the Summit. So Down trains travel up the bank, and Up trains travel down. Clear?

Of course, it’s different for trains approaching the Summit from the north, but (for the purposes of this layout project) I’m not bothered about this.

*The source of this is David Anderson’s excellent articles published in Steam Days between 1991 and 2003. In one he recounts the story of, when a teenager, being offered by a driver a footplate trip to the Summit from Beattock station, with his bike being tied onto the running plate of the banker.

Track layout begins

I have a basic track plan which is based on Beattock, somewhat modified to fit on a practical-length baseboard. I’ve used XtrkCAD as a planning tool, which has been okay to use.

The photos below show Board 1, which involves the southerly approach to the station. I’m checking whether the plan can accommodate one or two Class 439 tanks in the banker siding – great news, as it can actually hold three!

The Class 439 tanks are, of course, hacked Dapol M7s – not accurate but close enough for now and they look the part. Also, there’s only one tank currently, but eventually I’ll have three or four.

Operationally, the sequence goes something like this:

1. The banker runs down the hill from Summit in reverse (cab first), through the station (Up platform) and over the trailing crossover.
2. It then pulls forward over the crossover onto the Down line.
3. It then reverses over another crossover onto the siding.
4. It then pulls forward past the crossover, where it waits in turn.
5. When its turn comes, it pulls forward from the siding and drops onto the back of the train waiting in the station.
6. It remains uncoupled, and gives two crows from the whistle. Two crows are returned by the train engine at the front. A further crow from the banker is sounded, and it begins to push the train from the rear. At the same time, the train engine starts pulling, and the whole train moves off.
7. After reaching the Summit the banker drops off the tail of the train, while the train carries on, to coast done the other side of the bank. The banker crosses over onto the Up line and coasts down the bank, where the sequence begins again.

I worked this out from a mixture of photos, LMS rule book procedures, deducing tank movements from the track plan, and some relevant articles (which are few and far between on this specific subject). It may not be completely accurate but it’s the best I have at the moment.

The most complete source (though not entirely thorough) is Mullay & Coleford's article on the Moffat branch operations in Railway Bylines (March 2000), which, in a useful digression, explains the role and operational procedures of the bankers.

Major blunder leads to further hiatus

So, Duncan, why no progress for six months? Partly it’s due to having a rush on at work, partly it’s distraction by a major room refurbishment (“Hey, let’s decorate the study!”), but mainly it’s through lack of motivation brought on by a major error in the baseboard construction.

The basic premise was (is) to built a plywood base framed by 2x1 inch softwood, for rigidity, and then to nail Sundeala board over the top, for sound deadening, ease of scenic sculpting, etc. See this post for more details/rationale.

Turns out that the differences in measurements – metric versus imperial – mean that the Sundeala tops are too short for the plywood base, meaning that there is a 3-4 mid-market gap where the baseboards join. Here’s a photo that explains this better.

And a close up…

What to do? I can’t bring myself to dismantle the boards and start again. I could fill the gap with filler, but this would affect the ability to separate the boards neatly if I need to move the layout. My solution is to simply tape over the gap with masking tape. If/when I do separate the boards I can then fill in the gap at each board edge.

Meanwhile the track that runs over the board joins will be soldered to screws either side of the join, which should mean that the track won’t be compromised by any of this.

Time only will tell whether this is a decent workaround or just daft.