Sunday, 26 April 2009

Wharfingers responsibilites

 Can anyone clarify what a Wharfingers tasks/responsibilities were?

All the public sidings on the Wadebridge to Wenfordbridge line were called Wharfs. It would seem that each Wharf was looked after by a person called a Wharfinger who either lived in a cottage next to the siding or very local to it.
My interpretation is they would have been responsible for taking delivery/booking in of wagons and making sure they were unloaded in a specified time by the person or company that the load was for. I am doubting that they were physically responsible for loading and unloading as there were women Wharfingers at some sidings.
Any information would be gratefully received.

Saturday, 25 April 2009

Boscarne Junction + Wenford Junction

Just toying with an idea to extend the Bodmin North line to include the junction for Wenford Bridge. This would possibly change the viewing side to the top, looking down into the valley at Boscarne, rather than up out of the valley if I leave the plan as it is in my "Boscarne Junction + Wharf (3)" posting.

I'm not convinced at the moment. Think I have enough on my plate with the original plan of just Boscarne. May make an allowance for this to be added in the future. Ideally it would be two extra boards so that the road over bridge across the Bodmin North line and the ungated crossing across the Wenford line could be included. Ah, now then, that would also bring the Dunmere Wharf into play. This is starting to get out of hand and becoming a small layout in its own right. It is dragging me further away from Grogley as well. This layout is only a test build to try out my skills, or lack of them, before building Grogley Junction.
Enough.

Sunday, 29 March 2009

Further thoughts

While driving to work this morning I was reflecting on what I was doing the previous evening. Watching the Barcelona v Chelsea game, more sleepers where being cut and stained. I also opened the P4 point kit and read though the instructions. This brought me to thinking about my lack of progress with Boscarne. To create another short piece of test track and/or build the point kit is fine but I don't feel I'm making any progress. Building baseboards is where my head is really at at the moment and putting this off until I have more information on the Boscarne site is frustrating me. So why have I not put the wood to the saw? It's because I have this demon that says it has to be right. Boscarne is a real location so my layout should reflect this, including the correct height of rail above the river bed. Without this information I don't know the height of the baseboard edges. Hmmm.... is this so important?

This layout is suppose to be a test bed to see if I can achieve an acceptable standard. It is not an exact model of the real Boscarne Junction. A real location it is but with a fictitious history applied creating a junction that is different to the reality. I've already shortened the track plan and moved the river closer to the junction. I do need to keep an eye on the scenic areas to try and capture the feel of this location but it should not matter if I am a few feet out in the height of rail over river bed. I need to start building the layout soon.

So Bank Holiday weekend coming up should be an ideal opportunity .... but working Sunday and Monday, this is after a trip to Stratford upon Avon, for a bit of culture, on Friday/Saturday. Baseboard building will have to be postponed until the following week. At least I've made the decision to make a best guesstimate of track height. If it doesn't match reality I'll have to live with it.

Wednesday, 25 March 2009

Boscarne Junction + Wenford Junction

Just toying with an idea to extend the Bodmin North line to include the junction for Wenford Bridge. This would possibly change the viewing side to the top, looking down into the valley at Boscarne, rather than up out of the valley if I leave the plan as it is in my "Boscarne Junction + Wharf (3)" posting.


I'm not convinced at the moment. Think I have enough on my plate with the original plan of just Boscarne. May make an allowance for this to be added in the future. Ideally it would be two extra boards so that the road over bridge across the Bodmin North line and the ungated crossing across the Wenford line could be included. Ah, now then, that would also bring the Dunmere Wharf into play. This is starting to get out of hand and becoming a small layout in its own right. It is dragging me further away from Grogley as well. This layout is only a test build to try out my skills, or lack of them, before building Grogley Junction.

Enough.

Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Boscarne Junction + Wharf (3)

Well this is it, the test track! A little bit more that the plank with a little track and a couple of points but should be interesting to build. It should also throw up some good questions along the way.

I've been chewing the fat over the last couple of weeks about baseboard sizes and this is hopefully it. I've ended up with sizes that should fit into my little 306 leaving space for legs, stock boxes etc. Basic baseboard length is 3ft 6" long by 2ft wide, with two hidden sections being 3ft 6" by 18" and one being 3ft 6" by 12". Overall layout including hidden siding will be as shown below. I've decide to leave off the end of the Mill building shown in a previous plan so that I can reduce the baseboard width. The only item I'm not sure of at the moment is the house adjacent to the signal box. I'm not including it for the moment but as the project progresses it may well make an appearance.
I realise that in making this a Y shaped layout will complicate operation for one person if ever I get invited anywhere (a little presumptuous I know but one can live in hope :-)) but I felt it was the only way to finish that end of the layout off. If left as my previous plan the small amount of shunting would have always entered the hidden siding by some distance. By adding a little more length at this end should reduce this to a minimum. Also by adding the interest of the River Camel with its two bridges and embankments gives me some practice for features on Grogley. I now need to decide how to build the baseboards. The last layout I build was very basic using 2" x 1" with chipboard tops. This layout will have to be a little bit more sophisticated. Open topped construction looks favourite using techniques from Barry Norman's and Iain Rice's books. I have also been interested in some threads on the P4's forum pages about baseboard depth. I had not thought about point operation but have seen Tortoise point motors being used on many layouts and like the slow action. To accommodate Tortoise's under the baseboard it would seem that the depth of baseboard from track bed to bottom edge needs to be a minimum of 8" to give protection to these motors. This should not be too much of a problem considering I am now including the river and bridges.

Sunday, 1 February 2009

1st February already

Well were has January gone? One month on and not a lot has happened with the project. I've been spending most of my spare time consolidating my wargaming projects and finishing off units that have been on the bench for far too long. Still have a few to paint but, while painting, I have been mulling over baseboard sizes for the Boscarne Wharf layout. As I could be moving house in the next couple of years I have to plan this layout to be portable. Nether do I think I will be changing the car for a while so it will need to fit into the back of a Peugeot 306. Not a lot of space. Looking at track plan and available space in car, 3.5 foot is the maximum board length. 3.5 foot legths also fits the track plan well making the scenic length 10.5 feet long and adding a further 14 inches to the Grogley end increasing the temptation to add a halt. I've not finalised width but I'm considering that junction end be "Y" shaped following the shape of the track plan. Thus giving baseboard ends that are 90 degrees to the track and not cutting across at an angle. This would make this end approximately 2.5 feet wide depending on scenics. This would also create two narrow fiddle yards splaying out at an angle to each other. (Would this create a problem in operation?). The other boards could be as narrow as 18 inches. I may be able to get away with three square baseboards 3.5 ft x 2 ft but keeping the boards narrow will mean less scenic work. Also by introducing an irregular shaped baseboard will test my fledgling carpentry skills. I do need to keep in mind that this is supposed to be a test layout. It is better to fail and learn than not learn at all.