Baseboard Materials

Has Mark the expert had any experience at building a layout using L girder? If he has he should know you don't need to cut accurately. I do not need to cut as accurately or as frequently as someone building a light weight portable layout. We wait for Mark's description of his base board construction and any innovations or advantages, after all the changes of prototype and scales he has made, assuming his stories are true on the various news groups. .

Terry,

I would also suggest that you build some baseboards using the lightweight ply methods so that you might stop implying that the method is complex and requires skilled carpentry.

Jim.

A cursory glance at Flynn's website will reveal that he has a paucity of modelling skills, so in all likelihood these methods would be well beyond his capabilities.

Has it ever occured to you that a bloke can model more than one prototype, or in more than one scale, at a time?

Given your abject lack of imagination, I suppose not.

Any websites detailing both these construction methods?

Lightweight ply:

Lightweight ply:

L-girder:

or google dearch for "L-girder benchwork".

All the best,

Mark.

Now, why doesn't the L-Girder have any pictures.... *dun dun duuuuun*

Text only may be boring and a few drawings may be enlightening, but only pictures will make the reader believe that you have actually done what you write about.

The major problem I find with lightweight baseboard construction is it's light weight!

Greg,

If the lightweight structure is as rigid as your equivalent heavyweight structure, what's your problem? :-)

Jim.

Sound resonance would be the only one I can think of.

"Jim Guthrie" <

IMO, its "light weight" plays against it.

If it gets bumped, it moves.

Can I lean on it?

Can I sit on it?

Using small, that is less that one by four or one by three lumber seems to me that it will be less dimensional stable than the larger sizes.

It's lack of mass may make sound transmission easier. Not sure about that.

I'm sorry, but unless it's built as solid as brick you know what, it's not going into my basement and support my model railway for the next 20 to 30 years.

Light weight benchwork may be all well and good, and preferable, for a portable layout, but for one with an expected life span in excess of 20 years, solid is, AFAIC, the only way to go.

-- Cheers Roger T.

of the Great Eastern Railway

Lack of mass leads to movement and vibration. Also, finding the "right" combination of strength and minimum weight presupposes the occassional failure, and I don't like failure. Actually, I don't have a problem because I build solid. :-)

Regards, Greg.P.

Unsound resonance? ;-)

Greg,

I don't know what age you are, but I think you'll find as you grow older, your baseboards get lighter and lighter :-)

OK, you and Roger seem to be coming from the "building a long term layout in the basement" angle. I'm coming from the "got to get the damn thing in the car to get to the exhibition" angle (which I will be doing in about two hours). A lot of UK layouts have to be portable in some form or other - whether it's for exhibition purposes, or that the layout has to be set up and taken down every time its operated because of lack of space in the house, or that people move house quite often and want to take a layout with them.

4" x 1" timbers in an "L" girder setup just won't wash in these circumstances. BTDT when I built a small L girder layout 30-odd years ago and the baseboard twisted very badly when moved. The lightweight plywood method gives rigidity and portability and I suspect that it might be just as strong as the heavyweight methods, but I'll have to build a (possible) sacrificial baseboard to try it out :-)

Jim.

"Jim Guthrie"

I think your assumptions are correct.

In my view, the permanent, 20 plus year model railway should be built with 1 x 4 and 1 x 3.

For the , dare I say, typical UK small, portable, short lived, non-permanent model railway, then light weight is obviously the way to go.

-- Cheers Roger T.

of the Great Eastern Railway

In message , Gregory Procter writes

You could always add "liquid lead" to it to make it a bit heavier.

Mine get heavier, even though the actual weight tends to remain the same!

I have one of each :-) Just now I figure I move every 12 years and the main layout takes 5 years from concept to baseboard with track. It needs to be transportable and it needs to be rigid because I don't want to start again before I get it finished.

I have a portable industrial layout - 25 years old, it's a bit like Adam's axe, third baseboard, fifth track layout and it normally links to my main layout. At present it's probably one of the few 4' x 18" layouts with a 17'x4'6" fiddle yard attached!

I've left "L girders" alone - I don't see them as being rigid enough for a transportable layout.

My industrial layout has 3"x1" perimeter frame with two additional 2"x1" cross pieces, 9mm chipboard top plus 1/2" softboard top surface and 3/16" hardboard backscene on three sides as a structural part, all glued and screwed. At the same time a friend (engineering draftsman) built a lightweight baseboard of the same size - we compared them on club night and the concensus was that the extra work of the lightweight wasn't worth the not very great weight saving.

I still have bad memories of a lightly constructed baseboard section (main station - lift off section over hidden sidings) which warped after scenicking (also after track laying, wiring etc )

Somewhere there is a dividing line between lightweight and rigid construction - I prefer to stay well clear of it!!!

Regards, Greg.P.