Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, Northmoor said:

Perhaps I'm missing something, but surely model valve gear isn't under load in the same way as the real thing?  How much is behind the tender is largely irrelevant, it is the speed and hence load cycle (vertical/horizontal) frequency which impact the components.  If they can't survive a few laps of even a large layout, I wouldn't describe that as adequate.

Good morning,

 

Certainly, no valve gear should fall to bits no matter the load behind the loco.

 

Of course, part of the motion is driven in entirely the opposite way to the prototype - the driven pin pushes the piston rod on the model, not the other way round.

 

Poor motion assembly on the models passing through my hands tends to be extremes; on one hand far too tight (so that joints fail) or far too sloppy (so that components catch each other in motion - expansion links fouling connecting rods, and the joints fail). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[sandra]

8 hours ago, lezz01 said:

Sandra have you tried using black nail polish on the part of the loco that the bogie is shorting out on. It's very hard wearing and is a very good insulator it's also dirt cheap at £1 a pop in my pharmacy. I use it both on the chassis and rear of back scratcher type pickups that are my go to style of pick up. It's also good for the face of brake shoes to prevent shorting. If you give it a very light sanding once dry it takes the shine off it. 

Regards Lez 

Hello Lez, Thanks for that, I haven’t tried nail polish but I did try superglue which didn’t work too well but did reduce the shorting somewhat. I then tried Ataldite which worked well but reduced the clearances too much and she wouldn’t go round bends. What seemed to work was a combination of superglue, Araldite and the rather desperate remedy of simply painting the treads of the bogie wheels black. I also had to rebuild the bogie as there was absolutely no vertical movement possible due to the very limited clearance which I would suggest is a fault in the original kit.
 

As a result of all this she doesn’t short at all now but she does stutter in places which seems to be due to poor pickups which is the next problem I have to try and fix. Trying to get this loco to work is almost a full time job.

Sandra

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, polybear said:

 

This article may be of interest:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1306567/Fees-high-street-chuggers-eat-millions-donated-charities.html

 

e.g.  CRUK paid Chugger organisations (not the individual) an average of £112 to recruit each donor - and that was 14 years ago.

 

My advice is if you want to donate to that Charity then go home and sign up to their website on line - no fees that way.

One more point - if you pay tax  then PLEASE use Gift Aid on your donations - it means the Charity gets an extra 25% AT NO COST TO YOU (e.g. Give a Tenner and the Charity can claim £2.50 off the Tax Man).  Just one point on this though - if you donated £100K then the Charity can claim £25K off the Tax Man; however if you only (only??) paid £10K in tax in that financial year then the Tax Man could well come at you for the extra £15K it's just given/refunded to the Charity.......

Of course if you don't pay tax then Gift Aid isn't an option.

 

p.s.  I'm not suggesting for an instant that many of us have a spare £100K to go giving away - I merely picked those numbers to make the sums easier....

 

edit:  I'm sure most of us have had Charity Donation Bags thru' the door - well many of those are collected by private organisations that sell the collected bags to the Charities; if you want to donate then please do your best to do it directly and cut out the middle man.

 

One final point - I volunteer a couple of days a week at a Hospice Donations Warehouse and the donations we receive demonstrate the kindness of people (eg we had a record donated recently that the owner pointed out was worth around £2K - it sold for over £2.5K).  Sadly we also receive many, many items that are, to put it bluntly, total cr@p and only fit for the bin (e.g. a large die-cast toy car with a cracked windscreen, doors missing and paintwork that looks like it spent it's life being used for "Crash Test Dummies"); also unsellable items (for legal reasons - such as knives) or items such as VHS Video Cassettes (though some Charity Shops will accept the latter).  It's also plain that some people donate stuff because it's easier/nearer than the local dump....

 

Why do I mention all this?  Well the Warehouse spend something like £90K A YEAR on disposal of rubbish.  That's a lot of Hospice Nursing Hours.....

 

Rant Over.

 

All excellent points, well made.  Dad works 1-2 days a week in a Hospice Shop Warehouse as well, mostly documenting transport book donations.  He has also seen the good and bad.

 

Totally agree about cutting out "middle men" in all charitable donations; I have never signed up to a charity in the street (why would I hand my bank details to a stranger?) and have always been suspicious of how much the chuggers are taking from the charity.  Unfortunately big charities are largely indistinguishable from big businesses in their operating model and any organisation with a lot of money, attracts people who would like some of it.  But CRUK, warts and all, are still doing work that deserve our support.

[Captain Kernow]

On the question of whether model locos should be able to pull the model equivalent of their prototype loads, I would offer the following thoughts:

 

1) The way house building and house prices are going in this country, fewer people are able to afford a large enough home to be able to house a very large layout like Little Bytham, Retford, Barrow Road et al. I'm always a little envious of those for whom this has proven possible, but we surely have to be content with our 'lot' or face on-going discontent...

 

2) I've always enjoyed exhibiting my layouts and I'm not personally a great fan of being involved in a club layout, as I like to be in total charge of my fiefdom, so my layouts are relatively (or actually) small, so that one person (me!) can manage them, if none of my friends are available. This also dovetails with the fact that we certainly don't have sufficient space at home to house a large 'roundy roundy'.

 

3) In view of my first point, it seems to me that there may be fewer large home 'roundy roundy' layouts in the future?

 

4) As such (and this certainly applies in my case), I plan and build my locomotives to handle short trains, because that is all they will ever need to handle as long as they are in my ownership. That doesn't mean that I skimp on quality of build construction - I build anything to the best of my ability, within the time available to me - but it may mean that I don't pin driving wheels on push-fit axles, expect in response to a previous failure. I often install a fairly high ratio gear box, because I prize smooth, slow running over the need to run at high speeds for longer periods. My locos spend their lives shuffling up and down with a few wagons, whilst I grapple with their 3-link couplings.... - I enjoy shunting! 

 

I may also fit a smaller motor, if that smaller motor runs more smoothly than whatever larger one I may have in stock, because the loco (eg. a 57XX pannier) won't be expected to handle 50 wagon trains like the prototype did on occasions, more like 7 or so, if I'm lucky.

 

I'm entirely happy with all of the above. My locos tend not to run on other people's railways and when they do, it's also to handle short trains, so everyone remains happy.

 

I'm not too bothered about where my trains will go once I'm gone, but I would clearly like them to go to good homes, What I do do, is build each loco a bespoke box and each box lid has a brief 'provenance' of the loco, it's origins, who built it, what kind of motor, gearbox and wheels it has.

 

I'm also less likely to want to sell off any of the locos that I've put any kind of work into. Fairly recently I thought about selling my Hornby Stanier 2-6-4T, which I'd weathered, put scale couplings etc. on to and changed the bogie wheels for Ultrascales. I even took some photos, prior to advertising it on RMWeb, but in the end I decided I liked it too much and decided to keep it...

 

5) One other thought about model locos being able to haul heavy trains and long trains as per prototype. If we take the 57XX pannier again, it may be possible for a Bachmann pannier with a High Level or Comet chassis to manage 50 plastic kit box vans, but would we expect that same pannier to manage 50 whitemetal box vans?...

 

[John Isherwood]

Tony,

 

Some short while ago, you sold to me, on behalf of a CRUK donor, a rake of eleven Trix 'whisky wagons' - thank you.

 

These wagons have now been treated to a little care and attention, and are running-in on my glorified test track.

 

 

Also running-in at present, and within your recent theme of ancient kits, is a recently completed Anbrico kit for the ex-GWR railcar W14W.

 

 

This latter has been modified to conform to its condition as running in the early days of BR(WR) - ie., with some of the valance panels removed.

 

The kit did not come with cosmetic bogie sideframes, but I was fortunate to obtain some pre-production casting for these. The model is powered by a Black Beetle power bogie.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

 

[john new]

On 01/08/2024 at 19:38, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

I’m disheartened because even at such a young age for railway modelling, I already am completely confused and can’t understand the direction the hobby is taking (moving to less tactile feel and more towards new age digital technology), which is of course feels odd to me.  I don’t doubt the skill and passion of game developers, in fact I closely follow the development of Century of Steam, as the head of the studio, Mark “Hyce” Huber, is a very dedicated enthusiast and real locomotive driver (the rest of the studio is great as well), and the game is committed to being the best simulation of driving a steam locomotive, running a train, and laying a railway possible, and I absolutely will buy it, but being a computer based platform, it won’t be the same.  Also, Engineering CAD and 3d modelling software are totally different animals (despite the best feature of Autodesk CADs being rendering abilities).  They are great for their respective purposes, but are terrible for each other’s functions.  I am quite skilled at Autodesk Inventor, Fusion 360, and will learn Solidworx once I can afford it (I don’t have to pay for Autodesk applications being a student), but I am completely useless at Blender, Maya, and others, because they use much  different and less accurate methods to make contours and shapes, where traditional CAD uses input numbers to make precise geometric forms.

Interesting conversation last night at the local club running night with a “modeller” local but not a member. They are interested in expanding the full digital automation of their layout and openly admit the technology challenges interest them far more than what they term the artistic side. It is railway modelling of a sort but not a route I will follow that far. I see the way Peter Waterman’s layout is run, the electronics don't inspire me to follow that trend.

 

Back to last night. I did point them at the old Railway Modeller articles on Buckingham’s automated Crispin which shows though that using the current advanced technological solutions of the relevant era have always been part of the hobby. Writing this I recall the Ortogo (?) cameos/gimmicks too so it has always been there if not to the % level we see currently.

 

Edited August 6 by john new
Extra note added.

[t-b-g]

33 minutes ago, john new said:

Interesting conversation last night at the local club running night with a “modeller” local but not a member. They are interested in expanding the full digital automation of their layout and openly admit the technology challenges interest them far more than what they term the artistic side. It is railway modelling of a sort but not a route I will follow that far. I see the way Peter Waterman’s layout is run, the electronics don't inspire me to follow that trend.

 

Back to last night. I did point them at the old Railway Modeller articles on Buckingham’s automated Crispin which shows though that using the current advanced technological solutions of the relevant era have always been part of the hobby. Writing this I recall the Ortogo? Cameos/gimmicks too so it has always been there if not to the % level we see currently.

 

 

My view is that I spend so much of modern life looking at a screen and pressing buttons (like now!) that model railways is my antidote. I could probably learn how to use modern technologies as part of the hobby but I have no interest in doing so.

 

We really just need a way to get approximately plus or minus 12v dc to our motors and to be able to move things like points and signals. It seems to me that there are many different ways of doing this, from the most basic through to very complicated indeed.

 

Although the AC is not yet operational on Buckingham, the rest of the layout is operated by very simple on/off switches, rods and cranks and bits of string and rubber bands. If anything goes wrong the fault is firstly fairly obvious, secondly easy to fix and thirdly only impacts on a small part of the layout and there is usually a "workaround" that allows us to carry on running. Having not been involved in building the layout, I can easily see what was done, why it was done and what needs to be fixed to restore it to working order.

 

That will do nicely for me!

 

I have advanced as far as using servo motors for points and signals on my latest layout and I have some 3D printed figures and parts that I have bought. I think my delving into the world of modern technology may stop there. 

[lezz01]

Well I haven't decided what control method I'm going to use for Tewkesbury. My preferred method is to use DCC for controlling the trains and sound and then analogue for everything else. It all depends on whether or not I can fit a chip and speaker into kit built locos. It's a fine for the converted RTR locos but it's a bit tight in my craftsman and MPD 1Fs and I'm fairly sure I don't have any chance with a K's Johnson 0-4-0 ST although I might have a better shot with the Deeley 0-4-0 T, the downside of that is I will then have to build outside valve gear. Yes I know the little 0-4-0s were not used at Tewkesbury but my scenario will be that they strengthened the bridge at the bottom of Quay St and could use a loco down to the quay. In reality they used gravity down to the quay and then brought the wagons back up one at a time with horses and latterly a modified tractor. I'm not even sure if I'm going to model the quay as it has some very complicated track that I'm not sure that I can actually build or whether or not it can be powered. It's basically a scissors with a separate turnout superimposed on it to Healings Mill. I could stop at the end of Quay St and use the mill as a view blocker. At the moment the plan is to use the overall roof of the old station to hide a FY and the maltings the other end to hide the other FY and just model the shed area as phase 1 and maybe add the High St crossing and Quay St as phase 2.

Regards Lez.

   

[Chuffer Davies]

1 hour ago, lezz01 said:

Well I haven't decided what control method I'm going to use for Tewkesbury. My preferred method is to use DCC for controlling the trains and sound and then analogue for everything else. It all depends on whether or not I can fit a chip and speaker into kit built locos. It's a fine for the converted RTR locos but it's a bit tight in my craftsman and MPD 1Fs and I'm fairly sure I don't have any chance with a K's Johnson 0-4-0 ST although I might have a better shot with the Deeley 0-4-0 T, the downside of that is I will then have to build outside valve gear. Yes I know the little 0-4-0s were not used at Tewkesbury but my scenario will be that they strengthened the bridge at the bottom of Quay St and could use a loco down to the quay. In reality they used gravity down to the quay and then brought the wagons back up one at a time with horses and latterly a modified tractor. I'm not even sure if I'm going to model the quay as it has some very complicated track that I'm not sure that I can actually build or whether or not it can be powered. It's basically a scissors with a separate turnout superimposed on it to Healings Mill. I could stop at the end of Quay St and use the mill as a view blocker. At the moment the plan is to use the overall roof of the old station to hide a FY and the maltings the other end to hide the other FY and just model the shed area as phase 1 and maybe add the High St crossing and Quay St as phase 2.

Regards Lez.

   

Sounds like we are like minded regarding operation of a layout.  DCC for traction to benefit from the 15v on the track at all times but control the layout with conventional analogue. I can recommend servo control of signals and points, however, as the layout wiring remains analogue up to the servo controllers that are colocated with the devices they control.  The servo controllers typically need a  smooth 12v DC  supply and I’ve used a spare laptop computer (not USB) charger for this purpose. 

Frank

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, lezz01 said:

Well I haven't decided what control method I'm going to use for Tewkesbury. My preferred method is to use DCC for controlling the trains and sound and then analogue for everything else. It all depends on whether or not I can fit a chip and speaker into kit built locos. It's a fine for the converted RTR locos but it's a bit tight in my craftsman and MPD 1Fs and I'm fairly sure I don't have any chance with a K's Johnson 0-4-0 ST although I might have a better shot with the Deeley 0-4-0 T, the downside of that is I will then have to build outside valve gear. Yes I know the little 0-4-0s were not used at Tewkesbury but my scenario will be that they strengthened the bridge at the bottom of Quay St and could use a loco down to the quay. In reality they used gravity down to the quay and then brought the wagons back up one at a time with horses and latterly a modified tractor. I'm not even sure if I'm going to model the quay as it has some very complicated track that I'm not sure that I can actually build or whether or not it can be powered. It's basically a scissors with a separate turnout superimposed on it to Healings Mill. I could stop at the end of Quay St and use the mill as a view blocker. At the moment the plan is to use the overall roof of the old station to hide a FY and the maltings the other end to hide the other FY and just model the shed area as phase 1 and maybe add the High St crossing and Quay St as phase 2.

Regards Lez.

   

 

If you are worrying about fitting chips into locos, just look at what some of the good folk working in 2mm scale manage. If they can do it on some of their tiny locos, it should be a doddle in 4mm.

[Mike 84C]

The mention of Healings flour mill, brought back memories of delivering wheat there. One time the river was so high that the barges that brought wheat from Avonmouth were on a level with the lorry park and the decks way above! And all the meadows opposite like a brown lake.

[queensquare]

Another vote from me for DCC for locos and analogue for points etc.

 

As for finding space, this superb little visiting 2FS 0-4-0  by Bryn Davies has DCC and stay alive.

 

Jerry

 

[lezz01]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

 

If you are worrying about fitting chips into locos, just look at what some of the good folk working in 2mm scale manage. If they can do it on some of their tiny locos, it should be a doddle in 4mm.

It's not the chip that worries me it's fitting a worthwhile speaker that's the problem. There is plenty of room in the 1F but the two I have already built have all of the empty space filled with lead that is glued in hard and fast as DCC wasn't around when I built them and retrofitting chips and speakers wasn't on the horizon. I doubt that I can remove it without destroying the loco body. The problem with the Johnson dock tank is there isn't anywhere to put either a chip or speaker without milling out the tank as there isn't much of a cab on them. The Deeley one would be fine for chipping and speaker fitting but I'm a little gun shy of the Walschaerts valve gear as it's very, very small and the mince pies ain't what they used to be. Mind you Dave Basford has done a very nice etched brass kit for the Johnson so maybe that's the answer.

Regards Lez.    

Edited August 6 by lezz01

[Tony Wright]

19 hours ago, sandra said:

Hello Tony,

 

The Finney A3 60073 St Gatien has never been regularly used on Retford because it’s never been entirely reliable. As you said part of the valve gear fell off and then the wheels shifted on the axles. I therefore replaced the Ultrascale wheels with Markits but I have kept the Ultrascale wheels as they can possibly used in another project. The next problem was the front bogie kept shorting against the loco body. The clearances are very tight and the bogie is compensated as are all the wheels on the locomotive. The limited clearance combined with the compensation have made it extremely difficult to eliminate short circuits but after hours of trying I do seem to have succeeded in eliminating the shorts.

 

However another problem has now arisen, the pickups are very fragile and will have to be replaced as the running is still not acceptable. I did give her a run this afternoon on the Talisman and she ran reasonably well but not quite well enough. Here she is on the down Talisman entering the station.I am determined to get her to run properly and whilst it is very kind of you to offer to build another chassis, I am sure that she can be made to run reliably. I now intend to fit pickups to the tender to cure the pickup problem and I’m reasonably confident that once these are fitted she will run reliably. She is a beautifully built and painted locomotive but I suspect that it was never intended that she be run on a layout like Retford if it was ever intended that she was to run at all. However she is fitted with a Portescap motor and she is actually a very powerful locomotive and could be a great asset if the problems are solved.

 

Sandra

Good evening Sandra,

 

Thanks for showing this; it is, indeed, a lovely-looking loco.

 

That said, you have every right to be cross (with me), having bought (effectively) a very-pretty dud (as I have every right to be cross with whoever built it for not ensuring that it was 'fit for purpose' - that being, an ability to haul heavy trains at speed over a long distance). Clearly, that original builder (I have no idea whom) must have known that it was destined for a static, glass case existence, so I suppose (to him - I'm assuming it's a him) he'd satisfied the brief). That said, at a cost of well over a grand, the chap who ordered it should, surely, have expected it to work well (it was the only loco in the large collection, built in EM). 

 

What I find interesting about the whole collection, is about 50% ran really well, needing no attention from me at all (other than a check-over and an oil), and were sold as 'good runners' (no one who bought them has complained). A further 40% needed a bit more work on my part (but ended up 'reasonable runners'), leaving 10% which were mechanical duds, and sold as such. The problem with your A3 was (is) its being in EM. Other than on Retford, I had no other means of really testing it. Had it been built to the same mechanically-poor standard in OO, I would have known in no time of its problems (LB finds out duds almost as quickly as Retford), bought it myself (at a discount because of it being mechanically-dud), then mechanically-rebuilt it.

 

You should not have had to spend so much time and money sorting it out.

 

Finally, if the brief to all his builders by the late commissioner incorporated the condition 'It doesn't have to run well, because it'll live in a display cabinet', why did so many run so well? Two, built by the late Graham Varley, were, as expected, superb performers.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited August 6 by Tony Wright
clumsy grammar

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

3 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

It's not the chip that worries me it's fitting a worthwhile speaker that's the problem. There is plenty of room in the 1F but the two I have already built have all of the empty space filled with lead that is glued in hard and fast as DCC wasn't around when I built them and retrofitting chips and speakers wasn't on the horizon. I doubt that I can remove it without destroying the loco body. The problem with the Johnson dock tank is there isn't anywhere to put either a chip or speaker without milling out the tank as there isn't much of a cab on them. The Deeley one would be fine for chipping and speaker fitting but I'm a little gun shy of the Walschaerts valve gear as it's very, very small and the mince pies ain't what they used to be. Mind you Dave B has done a very nice etched brass kit for the Johnson so maybe that's the answer.

Regards Lez.    

You could probably use a large course burr in a mini drill on slow-medium speed and a lot of pressure to dig out the lead in big enough shavings that you could recover some of it and not have too much dust in the air.  Anything stopping you from attempting such?

[lezz01]

You mean apart from it not being good workshop practice and a good recipe for a trip to A&E? No nothing mate.

Regards Lez.  

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

3 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

You mean apart from it not being good workshop practice and a good recipe for a trip to A&E? No nothing mate.

Regards Lez.  

Fair, it is a botch.  Sometimes botches work though.  I’ve seen some brilliant ones, especially on live steam models.

[Tony Wright]

Yesterday saw the usual monthly gathering of three mates and me to operate LB; except, we just ran trains as we pleased because two other friends visited in the morning (thanks AJ for buying those things I'm selling on behalf of a widow). 

 

Some very-interesting models appeared, including...............

 

 

This Bachmann/King A2/3 conversion. Brought by Geoff West, it was an original commission by Replica, and was first used on Haymarket. It looks lovely and ran smoothly, but this shot is staged. Due to lack of weight, it just slipped on this heavy, 13-car rake.

 

So.........

 

 

I put my own Bachmann/King A2/3 conversion on the same rake (minus the coupling converter wagon). Because mine (Graeme King's own work, with my patch-repainting/weathering) is stuffed with lead, it had no trouble. 

 

All agreed that these conversions look better than Hornby's equivalents because the basic BR green is correct at source. 

 

Next..........

 

 

Geoff brought along this PDK A2/1. Originally built/painted by John Houlden for Tom Foster, Geoff acquired it and then weathered it. 

 

Another staged shot, I'm afraid, for this loco is far too light to haul the same rake.

 

So...........

 

 

Out with my 48-year old Jamieson hand-cut kit equivalent; an equivalent stuffed with lead. This took the train, after some amusement. Geoff reversed it into position, half way round the layout. Now, when it last reversed, I have no idea, but, obviously, the brushes in its Jepson five-pole motor were not prepared for this 'counter-rotation' of the commutator, and, when asked to run forwards, it stuttered and the red light came on on the controller. It was accompanied by that (almost) long-forgotten smell produced by open-framed motors. No matter, after a quick blast at full power with me holding the loco, the brushes returned to their correct disposition, and away she flew. I recall Hornby Dublo locos 'suffering' from this problem when they were reversed after miles of forward-running. 

 

Now cue smugness!

 

 

 

Geoff also brought along this DJH A2/2 I built for him (painted/weathered by Geoff Haynes). 

 

On just as heavy (if not heavier) a duty, she just purred around!

 

David Rae brought along this.................

 

 

Most-interesting LMS push-pull train he's making.

 

 

And this Crownline J19 which he built/painted.

 

Thanks, chaps, as always, and here's to the next time..............

 

 

Edited August 6 by Tony Wright
to add something

[lezz01]

12 minutes ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

Fair, it is a botch.  Sometimes botches work though.  I’ve seen some brilliant ones, especially on live steam models.

Sorry Rohan I didn't mean to be flippant. Having thought about it some I might be able to hold the loco body in the machine vice on the cross slide table fitted to my Dremel workstation. The head of the workstation can be set at an angle and I can keep my hands out of the way so it might be an option. 

Regards Lez.

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

7 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

Sorry Rohan I didn't mean to be flippant. Having thought about it some I might be able to hold the loco body in the machine vice on the cross slide table fitted to my Dremel workstation. The head of the workstation can be set at an angle and I can keep my hands out of the way so it might be an option. 

Regards Lez.

It’s fine, and yes, that would be a good way of doing it.  You might want to keep something between the vice jaws and the loco body though, to prevent any marring or damage.

Edited August 6 by 1471SirFrederickBanbury

[polybear]

6 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

Sorry Rohan I didn't mean to be flippant. Having thought about it some I might be able to hold the loco body in the machine vice on the cross slide table fitted to my Dremel workstation. The head of the workstation can be set at an angle and I can keep my hands out of the way so it might be an option. 

Regards Lez.

 

In that case chain drill it then mill out the centre.  Slow and gently does it, with eye (or even better face) protection

[lezz01]

7 minutes ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

It’s fine, and yes, that would be a good way of doing it.  You might want to keep something between the vice jaws and the loco body though, to prevent any marring or damage.

I can make myself some soft covers for the machine vice like I have for my bench vices. Now where did I put that off cut of vinyl flooring?

Regards Lez. 

[t-b-g]

19 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

It's not the chip that worries me it's fitting a worthwhile speaker that's the problem. There is plenty of room in the 1F but the two I have already built have all of the empty space filled with lead that is glued in hard and fast as DCC wasn't around when I built them and retrofitting chips and speakers wasn't on the horizon. I doubt that I can remove it without destroying the loco body. The problem with the Johnson dock tank is there isn't anywhere to put either a chip or speaker without milling out the tank as there isn't much of a cab on them. The Deeley one would be fine for chipping and speaker fitting but I'm a little gun shy of the Walschaerts valve gear as it's very, very small and the mince pies ain't what they used to be. Mind you Dave Basford has done a very nice etched brass kit for the Johnson so maybe that's the answer.

Regards Lez.    

 

Retrofitting a speaker and a chip is certainly more challenging. If I wanted to do that and new frames were available, that would be my choice.

[lezz01]

According to wifey the leftover bit of vinyl flooring went in the trash about 5 years ago. However I have a sample on the way from the bay of E for 99p so I can make up some soft vice jaw covers with some ally angle and glue and rivet the vinyl to the face of the ally and the jobs a good un. I can also retrofit the vinyl to the ally one's I've made already for the bench vice. Happy days.

Regards Lez.

[46444]

Good evening Tony.

 

I am considering purchasing a temperature controlled soldering iron for etched brass and whitemetal working.

 

I am thinking of purchasing this Antex model:

 

https://www.antex.co.uk/store/p/m12-w9wdk-mg96e-7bnxp-hke3z-ndrtm-cjw7g-cws4k-56tfy-djrm2

 

Would more knowledgable modellers be able to comment on its suitability.

 

I am not planning on competing with Tony on his level of producing completed kits by the way.

 

As a starter and introduction into etched brass kit building I am considering buiding this RT Models LT Hurst-Nelson brake van kit.

 

https://www.rtmodels.co.uk/london transport hurst nelson brake van kit.jpg

 

I currently have a general purpose 18W Antex iron by the way.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

Edited August 6 by 46444