sem34090 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Fancy Swooshy ones! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) Forget making it a tender engine; I think it would look best as one of those North London Railway 4-4-0T locos that was made out of leftover bits of Isle of Wight paddle steamers. Designed by Mr Adams, I think. This is a really good slide-show of NLR locos https://transportsofdelight.smugmug.com/RAILWAYS/LOCOMOTIVES-OF-THE-LMS-CONSTITUENT-COMPANIES/LOCOMOTIVES-OF-THE-NORTH-LONDON-RAILWAY/i-FBB4FMm Edited February 21, 2018 by Nearholmer 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted February 24, 2018 Author Share Posted February 24, 2018 After two days (so far) exhibiting at Model Rail Scotland, I've picked up a new loco for the roster at Linton - an Oxford Adams Radial, second hand, for £45. It runs beautifully, and has all the detailing bits. However, it's in EKR livery, although that appears to be one of the LSWR liveries with the LSWR number painted out and "EKR" and the number painted on. However, I'm wondering if any of the other LSWR liveries might suit for my time period (1900-1910-ish), perhaps the darker green. Basically, I'd quite like it to look a bit different from the standard, as-preserved, RTR model of 488. However, look at this beautfiul thing!(and yes, yes, I know about the daylight under the boiler. I have plans for that... 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Corbs Posted February 24, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2018 Bargain! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted February 24, 2018 Share Posted February 24, 2018 Why is everyone so concerned about the daylight under the boiler?! I didn't notice it until I read about it on here, and that was after removing the coal rails. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted February 24, 2018 Share Posted February 24, 2018 This gives me an idea... Forget making it a tender engine; I think it would look best as one of those North London Railway 4-4-0T locos that was made out of leftover bits of Isle of Wight paddle steamers. Designed by Mr Adams, I think.This is a really good slide-show of NLR locos https://transportsofdelight.smugmug.com/RAILWAYS/LOCOMOTIVES-OF-THE-LMS-CONSTITUENT-COMPANIES/LOCOMOTIVES-OF-THE-NORTH-LONDON-RAILWAY/i-FBB4FMm I was kindly sent a CAD file for an NLR 4-4-0T... I might edit it slightly... add the tender from my T3... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Regularity Posted February 24, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 24, 2018 Why is everyone so concerned about the daylight under the boiler?! I didn't notice it until I read about it on here, and that was after removing the coal rails.Because that used to the key distinction between RTR and something better, back in the day.That and separate handrails. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted February 24, 2018 Share Posted February 24, 2018 Fair enough! It's just that I didn't notice it, but then again my opinion doesn't really hold any substance. I may attempt to add a bottom to the boiler at some stage, but for now the model awaits finer detailing and the fitment of a crew, plus some minor weathering on the underframe (Is it just me who thinks green wheels left completely clean look wrong?) but not much on the body. Reminds me to try and get my terriers to something closer to (A1) prototype condition... and to bother to contact Branchlines as to whether they can supply rods for my Keyser Radial... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 After a long weekend at the Glasgow show, it's good to curl up and rest... and then get back to the modelling the next evening. The Stroudley G class 2-2-2 has been slowly receiving a few coats of Phoenix Precision "Improved Engine Green" paint, applied by brush, and is looking much better for it. The other thing that really helps is the appearance of its chimney! I'm still deciding how to go about applying the lining, and suspect I'm going to end up trying to go down the line of "N"-gauge BR white-black-white lining transfers, with one of the white lines carefully coloured in red Sharpie before application. This will definitely be a fiddly job. But, without further ado, behold, a properly-coloured G class! And the cab interior detailing is exquisite, especially when you realise this is all scratchbuilt, including the regulator handle painstakingly filed down, with what look to be dressmaking pins as the handholds...Another thing that's happened is that I've placed an order from Shapeways for a kit of the Millwall Extension Railway's Manning Wardle 2-4-0 loco... for which I blame Gary (BlueLightning), having seen his one. There are also a few T gauge wagons and locos in the parcel (mostly bought as a bit of fun and to test my painting skills) and there will be a special surprise item too, which I suspect nobody here will be able to guess!Phew! All this finescale modelling is starting to get to me. Think I'll put this aside to let the paint dry, and crack out the Dremel again for this fictional 2-4-0 tender loco! 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caley Jim Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 ......... The Stroudley G class 2-2-2 has been slowly receiving a few coats of Phoenix Precision "Improved Engine Green" paint, applied by brush, and is looking much better for it. Looking good, but have the rear tender springs collapsed? It's looking rather 'down' at the back! Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 Looking good, but have the rear tender springs collapsed? It's looking rather 'down' at the back! Jim Well noticed! Fortunately that can be remedied with a small packing piece of plasticard when the whole thing is reassembled, but thank you for pointing it out! Sadly, progress with the 2-4-0 has somewhat ground to a halt. The major problem I'm having is that the T9 wheels have a very prominent boss in the centre of the wheels, and this means that the coupling rods are quite a way away from the tyres of the wheels. It means that they are quite wide. Now, the C class, the running plate of which I have been chopping up, is a fairly narrow locomotive, and I'm running out of running plate to carve off! I don't think the T9 chassis is going to be the way to go with this model. I had rather liked it, because the motor is fairly low so fits inside the boiler of the donor C class (very snugly, but it *does* fit). No worries, I thought - I'll swap just the wheels over with some from another spare chassis. No joy there - the T9 appears to use 2mm diameter axles, which no other chassis I can find uses. So, things are at a standstill until I can figure out an alternative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caley Jim Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Can't you take the coupling rods off and shave down the bosses? Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Edwardian Posted February 26, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 26, 2018 Can't you take the coupling rods off and shave down the bosses? Jim Corbynite! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sem34090 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 I thought the current term was 'Corbynista'? Just to establish yet another label in today's society. Too many labels, and everyone now seems to want multiple labels, even if professing to want none! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Edwardian Posted February 26, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 26, 2018 I thought the current term was 'Corbynista'? Nah, that's just someone from Corby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Regularity Posted February 26, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 26, 2018 Nah, that's just someone from Corby. No. They’re Scots, not Spanish. Corbynite!Ah. His weakness.Also known as Dianne Abbot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 Can't you take the coupling rods off and shave down the bosses? Jim Sadly not quite that simple - the brass threaded inserts in the wheel into which the crankpins screw are long enough that trying to shave down the bosses would end in a resounding "clunk" - they're too long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caley Jim Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 Sadly not quite that simple - the brass threaded inserts in the wheel into which the crankpins screw are long enough that trying to shave down the bosses would end in a resounding "clunk" - they're too long. Can't you file them down too? Or would that not leave enough thread to hold the crankpins? Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 There only seems to be a few turns of the crankpin there, and the crankpin sockets are blind holes, not drilled through, so I'm nervous about wrecking the wheelset... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caley Jim Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 There only seems to be a few turns of the crankpin there, and the crankpin sockets are blind holes, not drilled through, so I'm nervous about wrecking the wheelset... I'm not familiar with RTR construction, but it sounds to me as though they've been moulded into the wheel and will have some sort of locking/retaining lugs on them, so getting them out, deepening the holes and re-fitting them will be out of the question. Pity. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted March 1, 2018 Author Share Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) Oh, the weather outside is frightful... 8 inches of snow outside, and no local buses, so we're not trying to go to work today. Having been sent home at 3pm yesterday, I think this is the safest, wisest move. As such, I'm bundled up indoors with tea and hot crumpets, and some wagons and lettering transfers... [Edit: Who thought giving tare markings as individual digits and separate hyphens on a PRESSFIX transfer sheet was a good idea?!] Edited March 1, 2018 by Skinnylinny 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted March 4, 2018 Author Share Posted March 4, 2018 (edited) Well, that was fun... So, after taking the day off on Thursday due to a Met Office red weather alert for snow in Edinburgh (which was pretty bad - at least 8 inches of snow at my flat, no public transport for whole city for the first time in at least 15 years, government advice being to avoid travel unless absolutely essential, etc etc), I was back in at work on Friday, so no more modelling done there, other than the two wagons I got completed on Thursday: the Cambrian LSWR van (just needs handrails added to the doors and couplings) and a Great Southern cattle wagon from a Mainline model (the not-quite LMS van, which may yet end up on a Cambrian wooden underframe). The Stroudley brake van got a quick spray of etch primer too, which I picked up at the Glasgow show last weekend. However! Taking on board advice given earlier in the thread, and based on fiddling around with the working timetable (still very much a work in progress), I've made a few modifications to the trackplan. Firstly, there's no longer a single-track entrance/exit from the layout. This has now been upgraded to a double-track bridge by removing the short siding at that end. I've also extended both remaining sidings under the station building bridge (which may still be shifted to the left along the platforms, allowing it to link up to the ramp down to the bay/end-loading platform; I'm as yet undecided) and added an access ramp to the end of the sidings. I'm wondering whether inlaid/nearly buried track for the sidings would allow easier access for horse-drawn carts and traffic. This does, however, leave me with a large empty area to the left, to which I can't really add track (nor do I want to, I think I've got plenty!), but which I don't know what to do. I don't really want to add anything that's going to block the view of (or access to) the track too much. So far, options include an embankment, perhaps with a road near the front edge of the board then disappearing "off-scene" towards the viewer. Any suggestions from anyone? One other concern: I previously had a single slip for the exit from the sidings, crossing over the departure platform road. In order to have access from the sidings to the departure road, I might have to change this to a double slip, though I'm aware that these would likely have been very expensive and maintenance-intensive. Am I better re-laying the station throat to have a ladder of simple turnouts? I have to admit I did like the idea of a single slip but I think a double would be unrealistically complex, even in as tight a space as the one I'm representing... Edited March 4, 2018 by Skinnylinny 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted March 4, 2018 Share Posted March 4, 2018 In tight places, the olden-days engineers were more liberal with complex pointwork than their successors, so I’d go for a tandem (three-way) and a double-slip, to avoid multiple reverse-curves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinnylinny Posted March 4, 2018 Author Share Posted March 4, 2018 Oh wow, that would really make the pointwork very compact... My only concern there is that I'm planning on using Peco Bullhead track, and while they've announced a single and double slip to come out this year, the tandem (three-way) point has yet to be announced, and I don't trust myself to build a tandem point as my first hand-built point! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Regularity Posted March 4, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 4, 2018 In tight places, the olden-days engineers were more liberal with complex pointwork than their successors, so I’d go for a tandem (three-way) and a double-slip, to avoid multiple reverse-curves.They also had various degrees of aversion to facing points, so an alternative would be to simply reverse the crossover. This provides an arrival road which would be used almost exclusively for this - once a train has arrived, another cannot arrive until this road is clear, so it would not be allowed to remain blocked for too long. Can yout clarify the role of the bay? Is it for parcels/milk/etc? Or is it for local traffic? If the latter, then it can arrive but not depart. I will download your image and draw some lines, but a single slip is high in my mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now