Castle Aching

[Compound2632]

The photo of the NSW No. 1 features the highly-polished the dome of the dome, mysteriously absent from the rather heavily touched-up photo I posted!

Edited January 10, 2019 by Compound2632

[Northroader]

Sorry about delay in coming back, I’ve been working on my doctorate on Amazon sales returns and Hermes delivery service for too much of today. Anyway, sizes you enquired about on the Irish J15:

 

Wheel diameter Five feet, One and three quarter inches, Wheebase L 7’6” + 8’3” T

Mind, that’s what I worked to, but can’t remember where from, as I’ve seen a published figure for total wheelbase of 15’ 6”, so there could be 3” adrift somewhere, BUT

LNWR DX, Five feet, Two and half inches, WB 7’3” + 8’3”

GWR Dean Goods and 2251 same dimensions, so it’s quite a good chassis to have for adaptability, covers the Major English lines anyhow.

 

Before we drift away from WW2 corvettes, I always feel the “Gift Horses” deserve a mention. RN destroyers were in a shooting war rather than a phoney war from Sept 39, besides the derring do from Lord Louis, and after the Norwegian campaign and Dunkirk losses were far too much. Churchill persuaded the Americans to give us fifty of their old destroyers, old WW1 designs which were being scrapped in the ‘30s. Usually our ships have a fairly high front section to break through heavy seas, these had a level deck the full length, so would get swept over by waves, there was a bad incident where a sea swept away the bridge with hands completely. They were poor manoeuvrability, bad for rolling, so the crews must have hated them. I would expect that in common with most American jobs, they were designed for a definite life, so breakdowns must have frequent. Imagine they were the backbone for convoy escort through the worst times of the battle for the Atlantic, it must have been really hard. There’s only one that became famous, the Campbeltown, which was blown up in the St Nazaire raid, the rest had a long hard war with the RN and RCN, getting pensioned off as the pressure eased and new ships were available, some even going to the Russian Navy. Back to trains.

[Jim15B]

Before we drift away from WW2 corvettes, I always feel the “Gift Horses” deserve a mention. RN destroyers were in a shooting war rather than a phoney war from Sept 39, besides the derring do from Lord Louis, and after the Norwegian campaign and Dunkirk losses were far too much. Churchill persuaded the Americans to give us fifty of their old destroyers, old WW1 designs which were being scrapped in the ‘30s. Usually our ships have a fairly high front section to break through heavy seas, these had a level deck the full length, so would get swept over by waves, there was a bad incident where a sea swept away the bridge with hands completely. They were poor manoeuvrability, bad for rolling, so the crews must have hated them. I would expect that in common with most American jobs, they were designed for a definite life, so breakdowns must have frequent. Imagine they were the backbone for convoy escort through the worst times of the battle for the Atlantic, it must have been really hard. There’s only one that became famous, the Campbeltown, which was blown up in the St Nazaire raid, the rest had a long hard war with the RN and RCN, getting pensioned off as the pressure eased and new ships were available, some even going to the Russian Navy. Back to trains.

They were of much more use as a political tool than actual fighting vessels. 80 were passed over in the end (alond with various other munitions of WW1 vintage) but only around 30 were seaworthy and most saw no service until much later in the war. However, they allowed Roosevelt to show that he was willing to help Britain and also sent a signal to the Axis powers that America was slightly closer to providing active assistance (later to arrive through lend-lease). Before handing them over Congress had to be shown that they were of no value to American defence, which was aided by the exchange of British bases.

Edited January 10, 2019 by Jim15B

[Edwardian]

Sorry about delay in coming back, I’ve been working on my doctorate on Amazon sales returns and Hermes delivery service for too much of today. Anyway, sizes you enquired about on the Irish J15:

 

Wheel diameter Five feet, One and three quarter inches, Wheebase L 7’6” + 8’3” T

Mind, that’s what I worked to, but can’t remember where from, as I’ve seen a published figure for total wheelbase of 15’ 6”, so there could be 3” adrift somewhere, BUT

LNWR DX, Five feet, Two and half inches, WB 7’3” + 8’3”

GWR Dean Goods and 2251 same dimensions, so it’s quite a good chassis to have for adaptability, covers the Major English lines anyhow.

 

 

 

Thanks, that is very helpful.

 

Pre-Grouping Dean Goods should actually have 5' wheels.  The additional 2" added later by thicker tyres.

[Argos]

McConnell of course was a madman who once built an engine with both outside cylinders and outside frames with the aim of demolishing pesky platform edges

macsmangle.PNG

 

Indeed and was known by the railwaymen of the LNWR as Mac's Mangle for obvious reasons.

 

I seem to recall that as built she had experimental rubber springs which were later replaced with standard metal leaf springs.

That must have made for a bouncy ride!

[Regularity]

Thanks, that is very helpful.

 

Pre-Grouping Dean Goods should actually have 5' wheels.  The additional 2" added later by thicker tyres.

Although only when the tyres were new: they could be reduced by up to 3” in diameter with re-profiling. Handy to know when looking for suitable wheels.

 

Can’t speak for Colin Seymour, but the eponymous created of Alan Gibson wheels told me that all of his wheels were a scale 1” under the nominal prototype figure, which meant that 00/EM wheels were about right over the flanges, reducing the chances of problems with clearances. Handy to remember when building models.

[St Enodoc]

Although only when the tyres were new: they could be reduced by up to 3” in diameter with re-profiling. Handy to know when looking for suitable wheels.

 

Can’t speak for Colin Seymour, but the eponymous created of Alan Gibson wheels told me that all of his wheels were a scale 1” under the nominal prototype figure, which meant that 00/EM wheels were about right over the flanges, reducing the chances of problems with clearances. Handy to remember when building models.

That's a good strategy. With Romford loco wheels, when they were made in diameters of whole millimetres, I always used the size below the diameter that corresponded to the tread diameter, for the same reason.

Edited January 10, 2019 by St Enodoc

[Martin S-C]

Weren't the dimensions of loco wheels just for the WHEEL casting itself, tyres always being in addition?

 

As the discussion has shown tyre thicknesses could vary considerably over the life of the tyre so measuring such a critical dimension as driving or carrying wheel diameter to include a 'wrapping' that no-one could know the thickness of at any particular moment unless you stood next to it and measured it seems a very curious practice.

Edited January 10, 2019 by Martin S-C

[St Enodoc]

Weren't the dimensions of loco wheels just for the WHEEL casting itself, tyres always being in addition?

 

As the discussion has shown tyre thicknesses could vary considerably over the life of the tyre so measuring such a critical dimension as driving or carrying wheel diameter to include a 'wrapping' that no-one could know the thickness of at any particular moment unless you stood next to it and measured it seems a very curious practice.

In my experience (caveat: not on steam - I'm not that old!) quoted diameters are always over the tread. Nominal diameters refer to new wheels - i.e. the maximum diameter.

[Edwardian]

Although only when the tyres were new: they could be reduced by up to 3” in diameter with re-profiling. Handy to know when looking for suitable wheels.

 

 

 

Indeed, hence one of the debates about the Oxford Fail Dean Goods.  

 

If you produce 5'2" wheels, as I believe Oxford has, then the model will always be wrong when it is used to represent an earlier condition, whereas, it will only be right part of the time when representing later condition, i.e. it will only represent a loco without significant wear to the tyres.

 

I read somewhere that such wear could reduce wheel diameter by up to 2" before the wheel received new tyres, but I'll accept your information that it's 3".  Either way, a 5' wheel could be perfectly correct for a late condition loco with wear.

 

My problem with the Oxford model is that its only strengths are its tender (if you want that particular tender type), and its chassis, which apparently performs well.  You would pretty much have to throw everything else into the bin for one reason or another. However, I suspect I would feel compelled to fit 5' wheels, if possible (and that might not be at all easy), so not even the chassis would be useful without work.

 

I take my hat off to Mikkel and Compound for taking on this sow's ear, but it's a good example of the adage, "if that's where you want to get to, I wouldn't start from here".

 

I suspect that the best use for the Oxford Dean Goods is to provide a chassis for a LNWR 0-6-0 or for a SE&CR O1.

 

By the way, the Dean Goods's 5' wheels at 7’3” + 8’3” is a match for the Cambrian 844 Class 0-6-0 and the H&BR Class B (J23) 0-6-0.

 

The Dean goods with 5'2" wheels is an approximate match for the SE&CR O/O1, which has a wheelbase close to the Dean at 7’4” + 8’2”.  I am rather hoping that the Golden Arrow resin O1 body could be made to fit the Oxford chassis. It was designed before the Oxford model was released and so is intended to fit the Hornby Jinty chassis, IIRC.  I do not know the wheel size and w/b of the Jinty, or, more to the point, those of the Hornby model, but I cannot help but think that the Dean Goods might be the RTR chassis with closest match to the prototype dimensions of the SE loco. Any further information on the Jinty/Hornby chassis would be most welcome. 

 

EDIT:

 

At this point I wonder if a table for some six-coupled types might be useful (items in red represent types for which a proprietary chassis exists):

 

Diameter         Wheelbase       Locomotive(s)

4’7 ½”               7’3” + 8’           GWR 5600 0-6-2T

4’7 ½”               7’9” + 8’           NER P Class (LNER J24) 0-6-0

4’7 ½”               8’ + 8’6”           NER P1/P2/P3 Class (LNER J25/J26/J27) 0-6-0

4’11”                 7’7” + 8’6”        GER Y14 Class (LNER J15) 0-6-0; GER N31 Class (LNER J14) 0-6-0

5’                      7’9” + 7’6”        LB&SCR E4 Class 0-6-2T

5’                      7’9” + 8’3”        LCDR Kirtley 0-6-0

5’                      8’ + 8’               LB&SCR C2/C2X Class 0-6-0

5’                      7’3” + 8’3”        GWR Dean Goods 0-6-0; Cambrian 844 Class 0-6-0; H&BR Class B (LNER J23) 0-6-0

5’                      8’ + 8’6”           NER 398 Class 0-6-0 (standard dimensions at Grouping)

5’1”                  8’ + 8’6”           LSWR 395 Class 0-6-0; SR Q/Q1 Class 0-6-0

5’1”                  7’9” + 8’3”        NER McDonnell 5’1” Class (LNER J22) 0-6-0

5’1½”               8’ + 8’6”           NER C Class

5’1¼”               8’ + 8’6”           NER B/B1 Class 0-6-2T

5’1¾”               7’6” + 8’3         GS&WR 101 Class (J15) 0-6-0 (5’3” Gauge)

5’2”                  7’3” + 8’3”        GWR Dean (with thicker tyres) and Collett Goods 0-6-0; GNR J4/J5 (LNER J3/J4) Class 0-6-0  

5’2”                  7’4” + 8’2”        SER O/O1 Class 0-6-0

5’2”                  8’1” + 9’           GCR 9J Class (LNER J11) 0-6-0

5’2”                  8’ + 8’6”           SE&CR C Class 0-6-0

5’2½”               7’3” + 8’3”        LNWR DX 0-6-0

5’6”                  8’ + 8’6”           SE&CR J Class 0-6-4T

 

I would be happy if anyone is able to add to or correct the above.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Edwardian

[TurboSnail]

I am currently hacking up a Hornby Railroad Jinty for experiments with SECR O/R classes (the O and R diameter and wheelbase are the same), and the wheels are 19.3mm over the treads. Not sure about the wheelbase though, I'll try and measure that later. Looks like I might have to try and get hold of a Dean Goods instead.

[Edwardian]

Why does it have 'The Empire' in raised lettering on the aspe?

 

Because it is now the Empire Banqueting & Conference Hall: https://www.the-empire.co.uk/.

 

Available for weddings, perhaps it represents an irony of a secular society; marrying in a redundant church.

 

We have lost so much of our architectural heritage and even though "re-purposing" is a ghastly word invented by 12-year olds, I am just glad that the building is still with us. 

[Buhar]

The Hornby 0-6-0 (Jinty et al) wheelbase scales to 7'9"+8'3".  Re-wheeling modern RTR these days is fraught with the variations in axle diameter so you're frequently stuck with what is supplied.

 

On tyre thickness, there was an accident on the G&SWR at Kirkconnel in 1867 where a tyre absented itself from the wheel.  The wheel was 6'2" diameter without the tyre, the tyre when new was 2.125" thick and had been reduced to 1.25" through wear and turning, so that's 4.25" on the 6'2" when new.  More or less 6'6" and then 6'4.5" at the time of the accident.

 

I believe the LNWR always quoted wheel diameters without tyres, but other companies (eg MR, CR) quoted the diameter when new with tyres.  Visually, we see the wheel as a whole so our oversize flanges contribute to that.  Hence downsizing is sensible and not just for clearances.

[drmditch]

Re: Wheel Diameters.

Some of my fellow volunteers and myself at Shildon did a random check a few months ago.

Black Five No. 5000 - national diameter 6' - actual diameter 5' 9 1/2"

V2 No. 4771               national diameter 6' 2" - actual diameter 6' ish !

 

Later in the year (I'm 'off-sick' at the moment) I'll try do produce a more systematic survey.

The above measurements were taken over the outside of the tread, but of course the conicity of the tyre would affect the actual diameter of the bearing surface.

Both of the above locomotives have run in preservation, 'Green Arrow' in 2008, and I don't believe have been re-tyred since.

 

It be interesting to follow up the question of tyre-wear on some of the 'working' locomotives such as 'SNG'. I'll try to see what can be found on-line.

 

This makes a nonsense of all those concerns about undersize wheels on models. I must check my Bachmann K3s again.

 

Also, I did a check before Christmas, there is not a straight footplate in the place. The Black Five, V2, and Large Atlantic all show significant bends and distortions.

The problem of models is that re-producing reality can look wrong!

[Hroth]

Because it is now the Empire Banqueting & Conference Hall: https://www.the-empire.co.uk/.

 

Available for weddings, perhaps it represents an irony of a secular society; marrying in a redundant church.

 

We have lost so much of our architectural heritage and even though "re-purposing" is a ghastly word invented by 12-year olds, I am just glad that the building is still with us. 

Perhaps we should be glad that it didn't fall foul of that other nasty modernism "not fit for purpose" and end up demolished to be replaced by a gimcrack concrete box.

[monkeysarefun]

Because it is a dark and stormy night here gentle reader, attached is an overly- melodramatically Victorian  account of an unfortunate fatal accident involving Locomotive Number One that occurred in 1868, as described in the Sydney press of the time.

 

Its a blurry image  - as most  things were back then going by the photos  - but hopefully it can be zoomed up to be readable.

 

However  be very ware, it contains gruesome details of a kind that  at the time parents read to their 10 year old offspring as an example  of what happens to children who don't eat their swedes but these days would require a 'CONTAINS GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS' warning and a phone number to a counselling service.

 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by monkeysarefun

[Regularity]

This makes a nonsense of all those concerns about undersize wheels on models. I must check my Bachmann K3s again.

 

Quite.

At most, model wheels should be no more than scale maximum diameter over the flanges, and even then, this can be a bit tight where the prototype has very small gaps between newly fitted wheels, e.g. GNR atlantics.

Anything between scale-3” over the treads and scale over the flanges copes with all but the coarsest of wheel profiles without creating too many other problems, unless the splashers are very thick mouldings. (To scale, a flange is about 1⅛” deep, adding an extra 1½” to that is quite a significant increase, being over twice the scale figure!)

The problem of models is that re-producing reality can look wrong!

Yes. Always an issue.

I can’t see the relief of the brickwork of the house across the road, yet somehow embossed bricks look more realistic than brickpapers. My mind is re-interpreting what my brain processes.

[runs as required]

1

It was worth posting the above press report from Sydney in 1868 for us to pause to think about the amount of time and effort it must have taken for the journalist to 'file' that story in all its grisly detail, pre-typewriter, I imagine in copper-plate indelible pencil handwriting copied out from pocket notebook.

2

I haven't been back to CA since 2 pages ago posting about wife's father's war in HMS "Honeysuckle". I am most grateful for more information from CA parishioners on the Flower class.

Our first overseas contract was in Malta during the mid 1960s. Wife with young baby and my sister-in-law for support saw a lot of the RN minesweeper families still posted there - which is why we had the idea that the little corvette had been a minesweeper.

Mention of  "The Cruel Sea": we still have a tiny flat in Valletta next to the Hotel overlooking Grand Habour in which Nicholas Monsarrat stayed while writing the novel.

HMS Honeysuckle seemed to get around - apart from the Russian convoys there were also spells at the end of the war passing through Malta to South Africa - I believe to Port Elizabeth where there must have been a girl-friend - rather than Simonstown.

I never got on with the dad - a flamboyant local character. He disapproved of me; thought his daughters could do a lot better for themselves marrying into proper Manchester 'Business'.

3

I've just read Regularity's preceding note about Brickwork and reality.

In architectural modelling it is always recognised that detail cannot be replicated fully to scale nor can colour be exactly the same 'hue and saturation' for portraying a new project.

It comes across as too busy - the model needs to be lighter in tone, The skill of a good model-maker is in judging the right depiction of a complex form and in representing the desired character of the brickwork colour, coursing and pointing.  The best I ever knew was the BR(E) 'in house' model maker above platform 1 at Kings Cross

dh

Edited January 11, 2019 by runs as required

[Martin S-C]

I was unaware of the "history" of the Oxford Rail Dean Goods' inaccuarcies. I own two of them, one in GWR green (which will be repainted into my freelance livery) and one in BR black for some 1950s time travel light relief when I want to try a different time period on my layout.

Is anyone able to point me to a thread on here where they are discussed? Thanks.

 

EDIT : Please ignore this request - now found some discussion in the manufacturers area.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Martin S-C

[Edwardian]

I am currently hacking up a Hornby Railroad Jinty for experiments with SECR O/R classes (the O and R diameter and wheelbase are the same), and the wheels are 19.3mm over the treads. Not sure about the wheelbase though, I'll try and measure that later. Looks like I might have to try and get hold of a Dean Goods instead.

 

 

The Hornby 0-6-0 (Jinty et al) wheelbase scales to 7'9"+8'3".  Re-wheeling modern RTR these days is fraught with the variations in axle diameter so you're frequently stuck with what is supplied.

 

 

 

I imagine a different chassis would require modification to the resin body, and that the splashers would have to be adjusted to a more prototypical position, but it does seem that the Oxford chassis is a significantly better match.  Overall the wheelbase is the same, with one inch out between wheels. 

 

One the other hand, it would appear that the Jinty chassis is ideal for a slightly wheel worn McDonnell NER 0-6-0 (always wanted one of those!).

 

Perhaps Turbosnail might consider supplementing his loco kit range with a loco body range?

 

 

I was unaware of the "history" of the Oxford Rail Dean Goods' inaccuarcies. I own two of them, one in GWR green (which will be repainted into my freelance livery) and one in BR black for some 1950s time travel light relief when I want to try a different time period on my layout.

 

Is anyone able to point me to a thread on here where they are discussed? Thanks.

 

I think this may be the single most comprehensive list anyone here has been allowed to post, even so, I am conscious that it is far from exhaustive: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/124764-oxford-deans-goods-readers-feedback-for-brm/?p=2797596

 

Among the (many) points I failed to mention were the misalignment of the tender and cab steps and the inclusion of ATC piping on the pre-Grouping version. It's almost as if Oxford Rail didn't know what it was doing.  In fact, I suspect, it simply didn't care.

 

You could go on forever with this one!

Edited January 11, 2019 by Edwardian

[Northroader]

Don’t go there.;-)

Edited January 11, 2019 by Northroader

[sem34090]

Perhaps Turbosnail might consider supplementing his loco kit range with a loco body range?

That would be simply marvellous!

 

He has lost one potential competitor and gained a potential customer at any rate!

[Nearholmer]

I must be getting old, because I read these discussions of the odd scale 2” on wheel diameter (13 thou, I think) of r-t-r locos, and similar matters, with some bemusement.

 

Last time I was into 4mm/ft we wos grateful for a well-used Triang Jinty chassis and a number of small, rough-cast whitemetal ingots, supplied in a box with a picture of a loco on it.

 

Dare I quote Harold MacMillan? Probably best not.

 

In jest, Kevin

Edited January 11, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Edwardian]

He disapproved of me; thought his daughters could do a lot better for themselves marrying into proper Manchester 'Business'.

 

dh

 

And yet, I recall a phrase heard in my youth "Manchester Man, Liverpool Gentleman".

 

(thus confirming that I did grow up in the early Nineteenth Century).  Looking for a sympathetic environment, I was terribly disappointed when I learnt what "Club 1830" actually was ... 

 

 

I've just read Regularity's preceding note about Brickwork and reality.

In architectural modelling it is always recognised that detail cannot be replicated fully to scale nor can colour be exactly the same 'hue and saturation' for portraying a new project.

It comes across as too busy - the model needs to be lighter in tone, The skill of a good model-maker is in judging the right depiction of a complex form and in representing the desired character of the brickwork colour, coursing and pointing.  The best I ever knew was the BR(E) 'in house' model maker above platform 1 at Kings Cross

dh

 

 I agree. It's easy with brick-papers and so forth, but I am continually having to tone down anything painted in order to allow for scale and viewing distance. 

[Edwardian]

 

In jest, Kevin

 

I hope so, or we'll have to unleash the Four Yorkshiremen (of the apocalypse)