Barclay Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 (edited) Google the words 'A proposed Manning Wardle' and you will find an article in Industrial Railway Record for February 1971 by Roger West. It describes the discovery of a Manning Wardle blueprint for a long boiler 0-6-0ST that was never actually built, perhaps a speculative proposal that was not taken up. The machine as drawn and described is clearly a development of the older 'The Welshman' and has many of the characteristics of larger Mannings of the era (1908). It's (or rather it would have been) a great-looking machine and I have wanted to attempt it in EM gauge for some time. I did actually build the frames about 18 months ago before becoming distracted. However I'm now on track although lack of time does restrict pace somewhat. I'm hoping it will be a relatively straightforward build, although the lack of end elevations will require some guesswork, hopefully of the educated kind. Here goes: The photo shows progress up to the point I stopped in 2016. The frames are very open with large cutouts, but it all seems strong enough assembled. Edited December 20, 2022 by Barclay 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5050 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 I remember seeing the article in the IRR and thinking much the same as you. Looking forward to see it progressing. Will it be sprung or compensated - and what gauge? I take it that the tube spacers are positioned as per the brake hangers. Clever idea - I have taken note! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 2, 2018 Author Share Posted February 2, 2018 Thanks for pointing that out - It's EM gauge. I should have remembered that given that magazine articles that don't mention the scale really annoy me! Post duly edited. The model will have a simple compensating beam between the front 2 axles, with MJT hornblocks holding things together. Fairly low tech but this has always worked for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 a mighty beast that ive got in my list to build one day alongside a peckett OQ ive got this same drawing with measurements on it from the IRS back issue pages, it says 29' 3" over buffers, 8' 6" from front bufferbeam to first axle, 4' 11" from first to second, 4' 1" second to third and 8' 6" third to rear bufferbeam and its got a scale ruler on 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
avonside1563 Posted February 3, 2018 Share Posted February 3, 2018 It has the look of a long boilered version of the big Littleton Colliery Manning Wardles. Nice! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Although the proposed loco looks big, notice that it is only 10ft 4in high. This is presumably is the reason for for the long boiler arrangement, as the only way to accomadate an adequate firebox and ash pan. This unusual arrangement suggests the design was prepared for some good reason, such as an enquiry from a potential customer of some standing, rather than just a sales effort. Interesting to wonder who, at that time, thought they needed a low height powerful loco able to go round sharp corners. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 4, 2018 Author Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) In the twisted alternative reality that exists only in my loft, that customer was my semi-fictional Saltport Harbour Board - just the thing for some tricky shunts down by the docks! In reality, Mr. West is unable to explain what the Kettering Iron and Coal Co. where the drawing was found, would need such a machine for, as they had no such requirements. Photo. below shows parts acquired for the project over the last couple of years. The Chimney is a modified Gibson product intended for a LMS 2-6-2T, and the dome is for an LNER pacific. Edited December 20, 2022 by Barclay 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanchester Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 In the twisted alternative reality that exists only in my loft, that customer was my semi-fictional Saltport Harbour Board - just the thing for some tricky shunts down by the docks! In reality, Mr. West is unable to explain what the Kettering Iron and Coal Co. where the drawing was found, would need such a machine for, as they had no such requirements. Photo. below shows parts acquired for the project over the last couple of years. The Chimney is a modified Gibson product intended for a LMS 2-6-2T, and the dome is for an LNER pacific. First thought was that perhaps Kettering was thinking about an extension under an existing railway eg Midland Main Line to access new ore deposits which of course might need restricted height under bridge. Second thought was that Kettering was three foot gauge? Is the drawing definitely of a proposed standard gauge machine? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 kettering was 3 foot heres the article for 13401 which states it as standard https://www.irsociety.co.uk/Archives/35/Proposed_MW.htm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 8, 2018 Author Share Posted February 8, 2018 Yes, definitely standard gauge - was Kettering all narrow gauge? This makes the presence of the drawing even more inexplicable. No wonder they didn't buy one... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
2mm Andy Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 Yes, definitely standard gauge - was Kettering all narrow gauge? This makes the presence of the drawing even more inexplicable. No wonder they didn't buy one... I don't have my copy of Eric Tonks' book to hand, but pretty sure that Kettering did have some standard gauge locos. There is a photo of one here; https://www.flickr.com/photos/5611hongkong/8448286482/in/album-72157632698705665/ Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 presumably for taking the wagons between the 3ft tipping staithes and the mainline. The furnaces, sidings and waste tips looks like quite an extensive system on the OS maps but they dont distinguish the gauges, it all looks the same Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rope runner Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 Scrap, coal and other assorted materials for Kettering Furnaces came in via the mainline. Kettering had a handful of standard gauge locos, so likely that this MW was for these pursuits - although quite why the (comparably small) furnaces needed such a large locomotive is beyond me. It's profile is definitely standard gauge - look at the size in relation to the cab handbrake column. Paul A. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGH Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) There was a connection between the Kettering System and long boilered Manning Wardle's as the larger three 3ft gauge locos were of that type The first was obtained secondhand and the other two bought new from Manning Wardle, the last in 1906 just two years before the drawing of the proposed loco dated 1908. Shortly after, in 1909, they did obtain a 15" cylinder standard gauge Manning Wardle 0-6-0ST secondhand, larger than their existing 12" and 14" cylinder Black Hawthorn 0-4-0STs. So maybe in 1908 they were thinking of a much larger loco, although it still doesn't explain the restricted height of the proposed loco. Kettering Ironworks was served by a standard gauge system, the 3ft gauge served to bring iron ore to a tipping dock at the works. After the ironworks closed in 1959 two standard gauge locos were retained (1 in use, 1 spare) to shunt wagons from the tipping dock to the mainline sidings until the quarries closed in October 1962. Edited September 10, 2018 by PGH 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 10, 2018 Author Share Posted February 10, 2018 (edited) The coupling rods have now been made up from fret waste from an old kit. i thought they looked OK until I saw this picture - they clearly need more careful shaping. However they are good enough to locate the MJT hornblock assemblies in the frames using hornblock alignment jigs. I still have an old set of steel Perseverance ones, and a newer set of aluminium ones from London Road Models. I once left the latter in a set of frames for a few weeks and came back to find them fused solid. It took WD40 and considerable brutality to shift them. I can only assume some sort of corrosion or a reaction between the aluminium and the brass. Anyway, lesson learnt, and LRM jigs are stainless steel these days I believe. Excuse the blobby soldering of the hornblock assemblies - the risk of de-soldering the components is quite high so 3 or 4 quick dabs of 145 solder have to suffice. The chassis frames have also had the firebox sides/ashpan details added behind the cutouts, and the boiler bottom fixed on. This allows the motor to be completely hidden when the loco is assembled - it's a particularly neat way of doing it for saddle tanks, which I first saw in an article on the construction of Avonside B3's in Railway Modeller back in 1985, but High Level also use it to good effect in some of their kits. Edited December 20, 2022 by Barclay 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hando Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 (edited) I don't have my copy of Eric Tonks' book to hand, but pretty sure that Kettering did have some standard gauge locos. There is a photo of one here; https://www.flickr.com/photos/5611hongkong/8448286482/in/album-72157632698705665/ Andy It had standard gauge sidings, but no branches. I worked it out on http://www.old-maps.co.uk Edited February 12, 2018 by Narrowgaugebeginner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 It's always nice to see the work of someone else that appreciates the products of the Boyne Engine Works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 (edited) A while back I stashed away a Mashima 1024 for this project. They are something I'm going to have to learn to live without going forward of course. The gearbox is a Branchlines Multibox, 67:1. I like the Multibox but always find assembly to be something of a Chinese puzzle, mainly because the spur gear on the middle shaft is a force fit, making it necessary to build the gearbox around it. Removal would therefore be difficult, which is not good because on this version for slim motors you can't get to the bottom motor fixing screw with it in place. There must be a more elegant solution but I'm no engineer so for some time now I have modified these by reaming out this gearwheel to an easy fit on the shaft, then pinning it to the adjacent worm wheel by drilling 1mm holes and inserting pins of 0.9mm wire dipped in Araldite. In this way they become one unit, secured by the grub screw on the worm wheel. I was glad I had done this. I put the unit together some weeks ago in order to allow time for running in, but after returning to it after a fortnight or so found it to be completely seized. This proved to be the motor rather than the gearbox. I then had to force off the worm (rusted to the motor shaft), drop out the gears, and remove the motor fixing screws -oops - secured them with a dab of superglue once I was happy with the mesh, so for remove read 'grind off'! Well the motor had indeed completely seized up. Some effort with pliers got it moving a little and eventually I got it running again, but to be on the safe side I replaced it with a spare, and all is now re-assembled and running well. I have never had a Mashima motor fail before so I am slightly puzzled - some brown staining at one end of the shaft suggests maybe rust, but they are silver steel aren't they? Can that rust? Answers from more knowledgeable modellers on a postcard please.... Edited December 20, 2022 by Barclay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5050 Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 (edited) I have a Multibox in my 'stash' which I considered using a while ago but didn't. I like the High Level ones to much! However, one of my gripes about the Multibox was the force fit intermediate gears and my idea was to solder the 2 gears together and then ream out as you have done. I may revisit in the future if I have a loco that will take the size. Edited February 15, 2018 by 5050 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike morley Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 You do get the occasional Mashima motor where the bushes have been pressed in too far. I came across two like that in fairly quick succession some years ago. One was simply very stiff and got extremely hot but did at least run. The other was even stiffer and would only run for a minute or so before seizing up. This was back in the early days of RMweb and a posting on what might well have been the original version of the forum got the problem diagnosed and a cure suggested within seconds. Open the vice far enough to let the casing of the motor rest on top of the jaws with the motor shaft dangling down between them. Tap the other end of the shaft with something suitable (I vaguely recall using the handle of a Stanley knife) and check again. If you over-do it (within reason) a variation on the process but using a piece of tube of suitable diameter can be used to drift the bushes back in a bit. I will admit that the first time I did it my teeth were gritted and my heart was in my mouth but Mashima motors are tough things and it did the trick very quickly and very easily. One of those motors is still hard at work, powering my oldest, most-reliable, sweetest-running loco! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 Definitely having a go at that motor fix - nothing to lose! I have 3 loco's that use a High Level gearbox and they all run really well. Why I persist in using the trickier Multibox is difficult to say. An aversion to plastic maybe? My Backwoods Miniatures RSH crane tank chewed up it's plastic gears when the quartering shifted, which certainly wouldn't happen with brass. Nevertheless I think I'll try High Level again next time... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) Now to the running plate, and the first requirement for 'guesstimation' of dimensions, since we don't know the intended width of the loco. My principal references are the drawing of 'The Welshman' by Don Townsley, from Railway Modeller for October 1970, and Fred Harman's book on Manning Wardle locomotives. The drawing suggests the running plate was about 8' wide, or 32mm. I started measuring other loco's and, within gauge of course, more modern machines tend to be wider. I have therefore opted for 33mm, or 8'3" for this slightly more modern machine. The running plate is shown with valences just installed. Wherever I can I use square section brass tube for these because you can't get them wonky, and they make the structure stronger. Sometimes with outside cylinders you need to thin them where the cylinders go, but still worth doing in my opinion. Then fire up the GW models rivet press to make the buffer beams. Again, no idea what they were intended to look like but photo's of other Mannings of this era show two vertical lines of rivets where each frame would have been attached, and two more rivets at each end where the valence fixes on at the ends. The final picture shows everything assembled with a trial fit of the drivetrain. Buffers are Kean-Maygib industrial type, probably larger than MW intended but buffer locking could be a genuine problem for this loco on some of my curves otherwise. There is a little curved bit of valence at each end which I will try to attach separately. I've managed it before... Edited December 20, 2022 by Barclay 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGH Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Now to the running plate, and the first requirement for 'guesstimation' of dimensions, since we don't know the intended width of the loco. My principal references are the drawing of 'The Welshman' by Don Townsley, from Railway Modeller for October 1970, and Fred Harman's book on Manning Wardle locomotives. The drawing suggests the running plate was about 8' wide, or 32mm. I started measuring other loco's and, within gauge of course, more modern machines tend to be wider. I have therefore opted for 33mm, or 8'3" for this slightly more modern machine. The footplate on THE WELSHMAN is 8'-4" overall - measured at Gresford Colliery in April 1970 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barclay Posted February 22, 2018 Author Share Posted February 22, 2018 The footplate on THE WELSHMAN is 8'-4" overall - measured at Gresford Colliery in April 1970 I don't suppose you have a picture taken inside the cab? I'd really like to see what the firebox looks like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 why not go see Littleton at the Avon Valley rly another large MW which would be just right as inspiration for the interior 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