Jump to content
 

OO gauge Turbot


DapolDave
 Share

Recommended Posts

As i hadnt posted these here before, and they had their debut at the RMWEb show but i think everyone misseed them, here are the latest Turbot Wagon cad/cam files for you to view.

 

All going well they should be here in time for Christmas this year, and possibly (but not promising) Warley.

 

Cheers

Dave

post-1144-0-37463000-1313744504_thumb.jpg

post-1144-0-20725700-1313744523_thumb.jpg

post-1144-0-62673100-1313744543_thumb.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't suppose you'd like to use the underframe to 'reverse-engineer' a Bolster-E, would you?

 

 

 

Now there's a good idea if ever I saw one.

 

Dapol Dave - Check out Paul Bartlett's site for bogie Bolster E, as well as splendid work on this forum to.

 

I'll try and find some links for you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't suppose you'd like to use the underframe to 'reverse-engineer' a Bolster-E, would you?

 

I thought that Dapol had already designed that in - they seem to have left off the door springs from the chassis - see attached photo of what it should look like.

 

post-336-0-20929600-1313751675.jpg

 

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the CAD further, it seems like there is still quite a long way to go with this, there is something very wrong with the way the sides meet the corner posts, the side seems to stop short rather than meet it, so that the pin that holds the door closed isn't actually on the end - I'm not totally convinced by the area where the sides meet the floor, but the images arn't clear enough to be sure...

 

There are a few other minor niggles - no frame behind the handbrake lever, and the L section ties between the truss rods on either side are missing, the bogies appear to have a step in them around the axlebox area, and I'm slightly wondering if the bogies are in fact Glocester not the correct Davies and Lloyd?

 

 

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bump stops are wrong and the brake lever has no definition to it, the vacuum cylinder linkage also hasn't been modelled yet so I agree with Jon that there is a bit of work yet.

 

I'd also recommend modelling the vacuum cylinder pivot on the cylinder not the solebar..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am rather reluctant to help, as there is kit for the Turbot already available, and it seems a shame that everyone is having a go at Cambrian.

 

Drawings of Turbot in

 

Bartlett, Paul W. & Mann, Trevor., (1985) Non - hoppered Steel Ballast Wagons. Part 4 The Plaice and Turbot. Model Railway Constructor vol. 52 (part 615) pp 418 - 422 & 444 - 445.

Drawings - Plaice diag. ZC511A : Turbot diag. YC502A
Photographs
including details.
Drawings of Bogie Bolster E is in

Bartlett, P., Larkin, D., Mann, T., Silsbury, R., and Ward, A. (1985)
An illustrated history of BR wagons, Volume 1
published by Oxford Publishing Company, 192 pages.

Also, including a few of the coils in

Silsbury, Roger & Mann, Trevor., (1983) The 30 ton Bogie Bolster E.
Model Railway Constructor
vol. 50 (part 587) pp 165 - 169.

Drawings - Bogie bolster E diag. 1/479 ; Uncoded Coil rebuild ; Bogie coil P ; Bogie coil P with ex BEV bolsters .

Photographs BBE
Coil R
Coil P

 

Paul Bartlett
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

HI all,

 

Good to see a 'state of the art' model of a Turbot.

 

Sad that another Cambrian kit has been hit on by the RTR bandwagon.

 

Overall not sure whether to be glad or sad.....

 

Anyway,

 

If Dapol do this model carefully (and correctly) they can back date it to make the Bolster E and also modernise it to make the rebodied Turbot - the Heron.

 

Interesting!

 

I wonder if they will do it in N as well as OO?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If i am to be honest, i agree that it's a shame that another Cambrian kit is being taken for RTR.

 

However in talking to 'others' within the manufacturing business i think this will happen more and more in the next year or so.

 

Basically it's a case of finding a model that will sell in RTR form and sell amounts rather than 'one offs', if that makes sense?

 

So i fully expect that the cottage industry (no offence meant) will end up with kits of more distinctive looking individual wagons rather than ones that there are plenty of, and that will draw the attention of the big guys.

 

Whether this is good or not for said industries is open to question, but in the long run i'm not sure it is.

cheers

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Dave, wheither its a good thing or a bad thing i curtainly want a rake rtr and look forward to geting some, as nowadays i just don't have the time to be building up kits like i used to so its another valuable wagon to add to my stock.

 

Maybe the kit firms could concert on other rare wagons never modelled like the mostyn acid tanks there superb and still not available very surprised by this as they would sell very well i'm sure! Much like the buxton lime ICI hopper it should of been made back in the 90's rtr but nope there was the caster high peak kit in the 80's and barring that not a lot else unless modelling o or n gauge and they were etched brass mainly so not an option to build for many of us, thou there is talk of them been made rtr but will it ever happen? Hmmmm

 

Thanks, Rick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi chaps,

 

latest Turbot files are in and i post them here.

 

i'm still not totally happy with the results and i am going back to the engineer with some revisions.

 

anyway, i hope you can all see progress here?

 

cheers

Dave

 

in the right direction, but still a way to go for me - I've pulled this photo off my hard drive to ilustrate the issue I have with the door/end area.

 

post-336-0-44264000-1315862959.jpg

 

and looking at your CAD in a similar way

 

post-336-0-51339200-1315862996.jpg

 

As you can see in the first, the end post sits behind the door, and there is a spigot that protrudes through a hole in the door, for it to be clipped closed. In your CAD that spigot still appears to be in mid air, not attached to the post.,

 

Jon

Edited by jonhall
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I have the photo's out

 

Bogies - the hole shape in the side of your bogie looks gloucester, not D&L, the D&L's hopefully these two images show my point

 

this one is actually under a bobol, but it's easier to see than on my turbot photo's

 

post-336-0-82583600-1315863977.jpg

 

post-336-0-47423600-1315863987.jpg

 

I'm not totally sure about these other area's on your bogie either

 

post-336-0-49959600-1315864383.jpg

 

and only a minor point, but the vac cylinder bracket seems to be a bit off - it should be central to the cylinder (or v/v) yours is off to one side.

 

post-336-0-86986100-1315864052.jpg

 

SO in summary, I dislike the body, HATE the bogies, and there seems to be a lot of bits missing from the chassis. :nono:

 

Jon

Edited by jonhall
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The cross rods between the trussing are missing too.

 

Vac cylinders seem to have been constrained the the brake lever pivot centreline which is a bit odd and should be lined up as Jon mentioned. I still think it'd be better to mould the pivot onto the vac cylinder to make it thinner and easier to model behind the solebar.

 

Brake lever could do with some shape to it at least within the constraints of plastic moulding.

 

The designer seems to have just made a vague attempt to copy the wagon from a picture rather than doing any decent measurements in parts.

 

The numberplate on the solebar should be a 'D' plate too, it looks like a sort of oval on the model. A small detail but it'd cock up printing the number in there a little!

 

I assume the model is running on undersize wheels and has a spacer on the bogie mount to avoid the wheels going up behind the solebars? That is certainly the impression gained compared to the prototype.

 

It looks a bit 1990s compared to what Bachmann/Hornby are offering now and to your other releases as it currently stands.

Edited by craigwelsh
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to thank Dapol for posting the CAD files and allowing them to be criticised ... I am sure we all mean to be positive.

 

In addition to Jon and Craig's comments comparing the CAD with pictures of the prototype ...

 

Spill plate is at wrong angle and not seen here is that it also extends down slightly behind the inside of the end on the prototype.

 

Outer wheel of the bogie is under the door spring on the CAD but inboard of this on the prototype [with its bigger wheels!] indicating that the side door proportion is incorrect and hence Jon's remarks regarding the door/end area.

 

The end mounted grab with associated step was pretty unusual on the real thing and only appeared on some during the later years. There were several variations during the life of these wagons ... no grab or step, side mounted grab only, side mounted grab with step and the one shown by Dapol. I have not recorded an end mounted grab with no step so far.

 

Underframe trussing looks to be oversize.

 

That will do for now as I have to pack ready for a few days wagon photography starting tomorrow.

 

Mark

post-330-0-12415200-1315939776.jpg

Edited by new puritan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Be kind, i'm feeling fragile :senile: :drinks: :bad:

No sympathy from me if it's self-inflicted.... ;) :D

 

I'm with Jon, it's definitely looking better.

 

The spill plates are still at the wrong angle though. The holes in the bogies now look a better shape, but now the frame above and below looks a little too skinny, like the holes are a bit too large, which I think is because they extend slightly too far towards the outside of the bogies. Also on the bogies, the ends appear to flatten out a bit too much before curving round to meet the axlebox. Again, that is only slight. The connecting pieces between the trussing is also still missing, although I appreciate that this could be a manufacturing compromise.

 

Thanks for taking the time to put these up for critique, Dave, it seems like a win-win situation for everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Jon, it's definitely looking better.

 

I disagree chaps.

 

The side door extends too far onto the end post now.

 

Looks like the wheelbase is slightly too long.

 

I now realise what I was missing when I previously stated 'that the side door proportion is incorrect' ... the sides are too deep ... compare the side profile CAD with the picture of 978114. Unfortunately I can't find my notebook with my Turbot measurements nor the MRC profile at the moment [still searching] but I think the sides were around 27 inches high. The sides on the CAD look to be nearly 3 foot high to me.

 

Could the solebar be too shallow?

 

Over to you gents.

 

 

Mark

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

 

A busy day today at Dapol Towers,

 

Here's a revised (although i am STILL not happy) cad cam of the Turbot. Be kind, i'm feeling fragile :senile: :drinks: :bad:

 

cheers

Dave

 

 

This is looking good................

 

A request from us (well, me anyway) scratchbuilders & kitbuilders - please, please, please, please, please, please, could you make the bogies available to buy as spare items from yourselves - there are so many other wagons that use them...........

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A request from us (well, me anyway) scratchbuilders & kitbuilders - please, please, please, please, please, please, could you make the bogies available to buy as spare items from yourselves - there are so many other wagons that use them...........

 

What else uses these? (apart from bobol's obviously...)

 

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...