Joint timbers and S1J joint chairs

[Phil G]

Hi Martin,
Just a quick question,
on a full size 60 rail panel would the two sleepers either side of the rail joint be 12 inch wide, to accommodate the the S1 J chairs? therefore giving a wider sleeper every 25 sleepers?
if so does Templot mimic this as you create plain track lengths? or do you have to do that manually? Or is it just the S1J chair that is used
cheers
Phil,

 

[Martin Wynne]

Hi Martin,
Just a quick question,
on a full size 60 rail panel would the two sleepers either side of the rail joint be 12 inch wide, to accommodate the the S1 J chairs? therefore giving a wider sleeper every 25 sleepers?
if so does Templot mimic this as you create plain track lengths? or do you have to do that manually? Or is it just the S1J chair that is used
cheers
Phil,

@Phil G

hi phil,

go to:

change this to 12" :

then in that template ALL the joint sleepers at the panel ends will be 12" wide and they will ALL have S1J chairs on them.

p.s. this is not new. it has been bog-standard inTemplot for 20 years.

cheers,

martin.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Martin,
Sorry for the late reply, been out all day. If I am reading your post correctly, and I am not 100% sure I am to be honest.
Your saying its is prototropically correct to have 12 inch timbers either side of a rail joint? Templot has had the functionality to do this for the last 20 years, but its not the default is that correct?

If so I can understand if that's the case, as pre plug track it would have been much harder to provision of a 0.66mm wider sleeper at every rail joint, especially when you consider not all modelers even bother with all the rail joints dummy or real.

Given its just as easy to print it exactly as per prototype as make a compromise, I will change my track if that's correct to do so.
Please note i was not looking for faults it was just a curiosity question on my part.
cheers
Phil,

 

[Martin Wynne]

Hi Martin,
Sorry for the late reply, been out all day. If I am reading your post correctly, and I am not 100% sure I am to be honest.
Your saying its is prototropically correct to have 12 inch timbers either side of a rail joint? Templot has had the functionality to do this for the last 20 years, but its not the default is that correct?

If so I can understand if that's the case, as pre plug track it would have been much harder to provision of a 0.66mm wider sleeper at every rail joint, especially when you consider not all modelers even bother with all the rail joints dummy or real.

Given its just as easy to print it exactly as per prototype as make a compromise, I will change my track if that's correct to do so.
Please note i was not looking for faults it was just a curiosity question on my part.
cheers
Phil,

@Phil G

hi Phil,

which prototype are you asking about?

in pre-grouping days (pre-1923) many companies adopted the practice of using wider 12" joint sleepers and heavier joint chairs on them at rail joints. not all companies, and in many cases only on fast running lines. it would be unusual to find it in yards and sidings.

after the grouping some companies continued the practice, but generally it tended to die out. by the 1950s most renewals would have abandoned the practice, but some existing tracks obviously remained in place from earlier years.

the idea of templot is that you set it to whatever you want. if photographs of your chosen prototype and period show 12" joint sleepers in use you switch them on. if they don't, you don't switch them on. it's the same with all the other settings in templot. i'm not clear what point you are trying to make?

the use of heavier S1J joint chairs tended to continue adjacent to rail joints within pointwork for longer. in that case they are on normal 12" wide timbers of course and don't need a wider timber. when i have got the chair heaving functions working it will be possible to swap to S1J chairs where wanted within pointwork, if they are wanted.

cheers,

martin.

 

[Phil G]

Hi Martin,
I thought you were aware of what I am trying to do, I am trying to follow best LMS REA practice in the late 1930's (the issue is I don't know what that actually was.)
I would consider the lines between Manchester and Crewe via Stockport to be mainlines. Although clearly not the west coast mainline.
The Manchester to Stockport section was a 4 track layout I.e. fast and slow lines in both directions.
right now I am concentrating on the 4 mainlines and will deal with all the sidings latter. In truth in my time scale I am sure some of these sidings would still be following pre 1932 REA, so LNWR practice, which am overlooking for ease at this stage.

Given most of the photos I have are of the late 1950s there not that good a source for prototypical practice in the late thirties.

One thing that does no make sense to me though, why would it be that pre the big 4 grouping most company's seemed to be using 12 inch sleepers at joints, but as the traffic got heavier, and likely faster they seemed to some what counter intuitively go to smaller sleepers!!
cheers
Phil

 

[Martin Wynne]

One thing that does no make sense to me though, why would it be that pre the big 4 grouping most company's seemed to be using 12 inch sleepers at joints, but as the traffic got heavier, and likely faster they seemed to some what counter intuitively go to smaller sleepers!!

@Phil G

hi Phil,

it's cost versus results. 12" sleepers and heavier chairs cost more, and there was little evidence of any saving in track maintenance costs as a result. improved packing and levelling methods were more effective than using heavier materials. also deeper ballast to support the load.

here's a nicely maintained rail joint in deep ballast. ordinary chairs and timbers (GWR chairs):

martin.

 

[Steve_Cornford]

Hi Phil,
Are you a member of the LMS Society?
They have some useful info, including a downloadable pdf regarding permanent way 1928, which is even accessible to non-members.

See :- https://www.lmssociety.org.uk/assets/pdfs/PermanentWay1928.pdf

Page 3 gives 45' and 60' panel details, including a note regarding joint sleepers for 95r ,B.S. RAIL

"special joint sleepers 12" x 5" may be used where the formation is soft or where the traffic is specially heavy and fast"

Starting on page 63 there are some diagrams of crossing timberings etc.

Hope this helps
Steve

 

[Steve_Cornford]

ps
Also diagrams of soleplates to keep Martin happy!

Steve

 

[Martin Wynne]

see:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?resources/rea-bullhead-track-drawings.12/

martin.

 

[Phil G]

Are you a member of the LMS Society?

Hi Steve,
Thanks for your post, great info, I was aware of the 12 inch timbers on the 1928 REA PDF from the LMS society, That was partly the basis of my first question. I must admit though I had not read the very small print about "the soft ground or the specially fast or heavy traffic."
what with Martins post and this bit of info, its becoming a bit clearer.

I am not a member of the LMS society. To be honest I have always thought you have to be invited into the LMS society, as its not quite the same as other societies. Its mission statement talks of passing on knowledge of LMS practices. (something you can only do if you have that knowledge.)
I do have a written note saying 12" timbers and S1J chairs were retained on the tracks over Stockport viaduct until the switch to flat bottom rail. Clearly that does not confirm exactly what was used 1/2 mile down the line thought.
It is not first hand info either and to be honest I can't even remember who told me. It does seem to be logical though.
cheers
Phil

 

[Rob Manchester]

see:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?resources/rea-bullhead-track-drawings.12/

martin.

A lovely document. Glad to see they make provision for straight cut and undercut switches.

Rob