Wright writes.....

[Iain.d]

54 minutes ago, gr.king said:

I've also recently made up four of those "scissors" equipped connectors, from scratch, in a slightly simpler / less detailed (but still working) form that yours, after finding that the Slaters type I used some years ago is not currently available, nor is any forecast of a possible date for its reintroduction.

Are there any keen potential alternative manufacturers out there?

Do you have any pictures / drawings of what you've done?. I think I need about another 10 or so pairs (having done about 25 so far), any ideas on something simpler would be much appreciated.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

[gr.king]

Here Iain:  https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?p=146524#p146524

[Iain.d]

20 minutes ago, gr.king said:

Here Iain:  https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?p=146524#p146524

Many thanks, they look good. I'll employ that method on a batch of LMS 50ft parcels vans.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

[Tony Wright]

Dear friends Geoff West, George Stevenson and David Rae came over for their monthly 'fix' of running Little Bytham today. 

 

What we've decided is that we now consist of a small model railway club, which meets once a month to run LB. There are no officers, no rules, no constitution, no subs and no politics. It works! 

 

As usual, some models were brought along, including........

 

 

Geoff brought along this ABS L1; an ebay purchase (builder unknown) which he's weathered.

 

 

And a weathered/detailed Hornby B1, ex John Houlden's Gamston Bank. 

 

David brought along...........

 

 

This ex-LBSCR 0-4-2 (builder unknown and origin unknown- does any one know?) which he's painted.

 

 

And a PC SR carriage of some description. 

 

All interesting stuff. Thanks for bringing it along chaps, and here's to the next meeting..........

 

 

 

 

[Steamport Southport]

If the LBSCR B1/Gladstone is whitemetal then I would guess it is GEM.

 

There was also an etched brass kit by someone called Albion Models who I think are now part of Roxey Mouldings.

 

 

 

Jason

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

If the LBSCR B1/Gladstone is whitemetal then I would guess it is GEM.

 

There was also an etched brass kit by someone called Albion Models who I think are now part of Roxey Mouldings.

 

 

 

Jason

Thanks Jason,

 

It is whitemetal; even the frames are made of the stuff! 

 

It's certainly of some antiquity, but, after I'd made new pick-ups for it and cured a short circuit it ran (despite its ancient Triang XO4 and gears) very nicely, if a little noisily. A product of its time, and of great interest (at least to me) because of it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Three first-time guests visited on Saturday, one of whom shot this video.........

 

 

It's really rather jolly, and shows (among other things) one of Hornby's latest 9Fs in action, my new Pro-Scale A4 at work and one of Syd's donated locos, a Jubilee, which one of the friends bought.

[Barry Ten]

After a pleasant few days away in France, I've returned to the 2021 class this evening. Not the best pictures as my tripod is elsewhere, but should give an idea of progress. I'm always very happy to get the handrails finished, after making the usual offerings to the floor monster.

 

 

 

Al

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

I've just taken delivery of several locos and carriages, ostensibly-built by a 'professional' model-maker. The locos (kit-built) don't run and the carriages won't go round 2' 6" radius curves (the bogies foul the trussing). The owner drove up from the home counties bringing them.

 

I'm investigating (I think I've already fixed two locos), but some will need a complete mechanical rebuild. Add on to that the fact that they're all fitted with the cursed DCC, including sound in some cases! 

 

Taking bodies off is fraught with difficulty - too tight a fit and a serpent's nest of wires everywhere. Pick-ups, in the main, are dire, axles are far too tight a fit in their bearings, the gearboxes (mainly High-Level) are assembled poorly (yes, they can be built incorrectly), coupling rods (where present - yes, one loco has none!) have no clearance in their bearings, the wretched friction-fit drivers have rusty tyres and there is not enough clearance beneath the frames for bogie wheels on some. Speaking of bogie wheels; how many Raven Atlantics had eight-spoked bogie wheels?! Not only that, all the wheels are black, yet the loco/tender bodies are painted LNER green (lined incorrectly). 

 

Yet, good, hard-earned money has been spent on these 'creations'. The irony (other than the C7) is that they look very natural and pretty - in static mode. 

 

I wonder how typical this situation is? Kit-built locos which don't work properly (in some cases not working at all). I've seen scores, so it's my view that the situation is not uncommon. 

 

Obviously, I'll not mention the builder, but I'll take some pictures in due course.

 

Can I fix them? We'll have to see, though I wish they weren't DCC. All it does is strengthen my resolve never to touch the stuff! 

[thegreenhowards]

I know that none of my kit built chassis worked well before you showed me how. And I still find that part of a kit build the hardest and most stressful.  They take a lot of fettling.  I’m much happier putting a body on a RTR chassis when I can find one of the correct dimensions.

[micklner]

        Would it be sensible to remove the DCC wiring etc until they actually work? I would'nt touch one without doing so first !!

        I doubt many kit Coaches (I presume Bogie vehicles) would go around curves under 2ft 6 ins, without the Solebars being moved further out or a lot of cutting wheres the wheels touch ?

[LNERandBR]

The normal advice is to ensure a loco works well on DC before adding a DCC decoder. I'd therefore agree that removing the decoders until the chassis runs sweetly is the best way forward there 🙂

[Tony Wright]

55 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

I know that none of my kit built chassis worked well before you showed me how. And I still find that part of a kit build the hardest and most stressful.  They take a lot of fettling.  I’m much happier putting a body on a RTR chassis when I can find one of the correct dimensions.

Good morning Andrew,

 

But you don't claim to be a professional 'model-maker'.

 

Regarding kit-built locos which pass through my hands, off the top of my head I'd reckon over 80% don't work properly. 'Properly', of course, needs qualification. 'Good-runner' often means a loco will (just about) get from one end to the other of a yard of dead-straight Peco Streamline - I stress, 'just about'. 'Properly' to me means Little Bytham (or Retford, or Buckingham, or London Road, or.............) running!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

9 minutes ago, micklner said:

        Would it be sensible to remove the DCC wiring etc until they actually work? I would'nt touch one without doing so first !!

        I doubt many kit Coaches (I presume Bogie vehicles) would go around curves under 2ft 6 ins, without the Solebars being moved further out or a lot of cutting wheres the wheels touch ?

Good morning Mick,

 

It might be 'sensible' to remove the DCC wiring, but how does one do that (with ease) when the connections are soldered to a decoder which appears to be glued inside a smokebox? I've tugged at the wires, but it just won't budge! 

 

My method of testing is to just by-pass the decoders, by just putting crocodile clips to the brush terminals and applying straight DC (will this harm the chip?). 

 

As for bogie coaches negotiating 2' 6" radius curves, I've rarely had to shave anything off the inside of the solebars or move them out.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Northmoor]

58 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Andrew,

 

But you don't claim to be a professional 'model-maker'.

 

Regarding kit-built locos which pass through my hands, off the top of my head I'd reckon over 80% don't work properly. 'Properly', of course, needs qualification. 'Good-runner' often means a loco will (just about) get from one end to the other of a yard of dead-straight Peco Streamline - I stress, 'just about'. 'Properly' to me means Little Bytham (or Retford, or Buckingham, or London Road, or.............) running!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I think you've answered your own question Tony.  Most "testing" by model loco builders is a yard length straight, the more thorough will include a couple of perhaps medium radius points*.  Then there is, as you've said, the aspect that many railway modellers are more collectors than layout builders/operators, so a lot of locos may never leave the display cabinet, but they were built to run - or commissioned to do so - in the hope that one day the owner would have a layout to operate them on.  Plus, we all interpret "professional" to mean "highly competent", when it only means they were paid.  I once paid a mechanic to fix a fuel system fault on my car, but I wouldn't pay him twice.

 

*Most of us started out with a roundy-roundy in our youth, with sharp curves out of necessity.  When building "serious" layouts later, there is a high proportion of end to end layouts which may have only medium or large radius points (and no curves); after all operators of kit-built locos are probably the type to want their track layout to look as realistic as the trains.  

 

Rob

Edited September 28, 2022 by Northmoor
Extra text

[polybear]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've just taken delivery of several locos and carriages, ostensibly-built by a 'professional' model-maker. The locos (kit-built) don't run and the carriages won't go round 2' 6" radius curves (the bogies foul the trussing). The owner drove up from the home counties bringing them.

 

It's amazing just how many kit-built locos appear on ebay that are supposedly "professionally built" - yet there's rarely any mention of who the "professional" actually was/is.

[Tony Wright]

24 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I think you've answered your own question Tony.  Most "testing" by model loco builders is a yard length straight, the more thorough will include a couple of perhaps medium radius points*.  Then there is, as you've said, the aspect that many railway modellers are more collectors than layout builders/operators, so a lot of locos may never leave the display cabinet, but they were built to run - or commissioned to do so - in the hope that one day the owner would have a layout to operate them on.  Plus, we all interpret "professional" to mean "highly competent", when it only means they were paid.  I once paid a mechanic to fix a fuel system fault on my car, but I wouldn't pay him twice.

 

*Most of us started out with a roundy-roundy in our youth, with sharp curves out of necessity.  When building "serious" layouts later, there is a high proportion of end to end layouts which may have only medium or large radius points (and no curves); after all operators of kit-built locos are probably the type to want their track layout to look as realistic as the trains.  

 

Rob

Thanks Rob,

 

I always test any loco or item of rolling stock I build on Bytham's tightest curves. Now, I know the ruling minimum radius is 3', but that's on the running lines. One or two of the kick-back sidings have medium radius or curved Peco Streamline points, so anything new is tested there. Once happy, I know there'll be no problems on the main lines.

 

Prior to having a convenient layout at home, in my Wolverhampton workshop I deliberately laid a 'dodgy' reverse curve, meaning that anything running over that would run fine on decent track. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

15 minutes ago, polybear said:

 

It's amazing just how many kit-built locos appear on ebay that are supposedly "professionally built" - yet there's rarely any mention of who the "professional" actually was/is.

Good morning Brian,

 

All the best professional model-makers/painters sign their work.

 

I was once presented with a loco I'd made which had been originally painted by Ian Rathbone. I'd built it for a customer a few years before. It had been sold on ebay and the new owner had had it altered (detail-wise, for a later manifestation of the type) and repainted, completely removing any provenance. 

 

When I told him that he'd probably now 'devalued' it he didn't seem to care. I couldn't believe it, such was the beauty of the original, fully-lined, paint job, now repainted in plain black (not too brilliantly) and weathered to near obliteration!

 

Talk about making a sow's ear out of a silk purse........

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Chamby]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Mick,

 

It might be 'sensible' to remove the DCC wiring, but how does one do that (with ease) when the connections are soldered to a decoder which appears to be glued inside a smokebox? I've tugged at the wires, but it just won't budge! 

 

Tony, removing the chips is usually straightforward and you should be able to preserve them.  Try to leave the wires attached to the chip and re-wire the loco if necessary, so snip the wires leaving a length attached to the chip, rather than unsolder wires from the chip itself.  Orange and grey will go to the motor, red and black to the pick-ups.  All the other wires are used for working lights, stay-alive, firebox flicker etc. which often aren’t fitted, so those wires are probably just hanging off the chip.

 

If a sound chip is fitted, there will be an additional two wires of the same colour for the speaker, often brown (ESU) or purple (Zimo).  Again you can just snip these if necessary, leaving a length still attached to the chip.

 

If the chip has a protective plastic coating attached to it, and the coating is glued rather than the chip itself, you might be able to remove it intact.  Otherwise the chip might have to be sacrificed.  

 

[cctransuk]

38 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

When I told him that he'd probably now 'devalued' it he didn't seem to care.

 

Tony,

 

I can relate to the person in question. Presumably, he had bought the loco as something he could use, rather than as a showcase model about which he could 'name-drop' its 'provenance'.

 

He needed / preferred to have it in unlined black, and had done the repaint himself to the best of his ability. In your own favourite expression, it was 'his' - and he valued it for that, rather than for any perceived 'provenance'.

 

I'm not sure why model builders sign their work - surely it is something of an affectation? There are excellent artisans in many fields of endeavour, and we employ them to do a job better than we could do ourselves, or simply because we haven't the time to do so. We pay them their due, but we don't expect them to apply their mark to the finished job.

 

John Isherwood.

Edited September 28, 2022 by cctransuk

[Mike 84C]

Craftsmen have always applied "their" mark/name to their creations. It goes back to the old Guilds and the middle ages.

[Northmoor]

26 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

I'm not sure why model builders sign their work

Because it's their guarantee; it is saying that they are happy for their name to be attributed to the work (and likely, will repair a problem found later).  A builder who doesn't sign a commission could just deny they built it; even if you think you have a unique model, how can you prove no-one else has ever built another? 

[Barry Ten]

I've bought a few coaches from ebay where it hasn't always been easy to assess the quality of the model from the photos. If it's marked as a Larry Goddard model, or Lawrence Scale Models, then it's a much safer bet that the coach will be a good investment - although a knowledgeable seller will also know to push up the price accordingly.

 

All my coaches have to get around 2'6" curves with a margin of error for tight-spots, and it's nice if they can be pushed through a Peco double slip, which I think gets down to around 2' on the diverging routes. I've never had to move solebars out but I've sometimes had to cut slots in the underframe for flange clearance.

[Bucoops]

I've been building a chassis recently which is by a reasonably well know designer and I've been struggling to get it to go round R2. It's an 0-6-2 but even as an 0-6-0 it would derail. This is where my inexperience shows up however - I eventually decided to measure the frame width - 12.7mm. so with the bearings, well over the recommended. I've tweaked it now and the overall width with the bearings is 12.9 and it JUST goes round an R2 S-bend. So nearly there... 

[Barry Ten]

I must say those side-on shots of the Hornby 9F on LB look the absolute business. I didn't think I was in the market for one, with a Bachmann Evening Star and my old super-detailed tender-drive one already on the books, but I might be having a wobble.