Jon Harbour Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Any chance of such a beast appearing in 'N' Dave? Please?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Afternoon all, and good to see that the brake tender is getting plenty of interest. As Dave stated the CAD/CAM drawings have under gone a large number of revisions since those published in the December issue as we move this project forward. However, all constructive comments are greatly appreciated as we really want to make this model of the diesel brake tender as good as it possibly can be. With regard to the Spalding show - my apologies. However, if anyone wishes to pass on any comments directly to myself please e-mail Hornby.magazine@wildcomms.com - we still have time to make amendments and I would greatly value the input of anyone who has information or views on the diesel brake tender model. I will also add images of the latest CAD/CAM file to this thread asap. Best regards, Mike Wild. 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Morning All! Below are a few images from the latest CAD/CAM drawings for the Hornby Magazine Diesel Brake Tender. Any suggestions and comments are welcome - we want to get this model right and before we hit the big green button to start metal cutting! Enjoy! If you have any comments please feel free to contact me by e-mailing Hornby.magazine@wildcomms.com Best regards, Mike Wild. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RedgateModels Posted November 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 16, 2012 Can't say fairer than that. Shame it's just out of period for me, oh well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Downendian Posted November 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 16, 2012 Hi Mike I applaud your approach. I'm sure you will get constructive feedback. I hope this will be the norm from now on- other RTR suppliers outside the Dapol stable would benefit too if they adopted this approach, as would other commissioned models. Neil 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted November 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 16, 2012 I'm not interested in them - thankfully well out of period for me - but that latest CAD shows a distinct improvement in the curvature of the upper part, Eastern pattern lamps with Gresley bogies is a nice touch as is using Class 8 headcode; but it presumably means both ends will be lamped? The step on the bottom front of the bogie needs to be squared off - if possible - and there are no lifeguards, look at the pic on this link - The shape of the top of the bogies doesn't look quite right to me but that might be due to their pale colouring. No comment on bodyside detail as it did vary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I'm not interested in them - thankfully well out of period for me - but that latest CAD shows a distinct improvement in the curvature of the upper part, Eastern pattern lamps with Gresley bogies is a nice touch as is using Class 8 headcode; but it presumably means both ends will be lamped? The step on the bottom front of the bogie needs to be squared off - if possible - and there are no lifeguards, look at the pic on this link - http://www.flickr.co...610621/sizes/l/ The shape of the top of the bogies doesn't look quite right to me but that might be due to their pale colouring. No comment on bodyside detail as it did vary. Thanks for the comments. The lamps will be separate items which will be in the detailing pack rather than permanently fixed to the model. With regard to the guard irons some vehicles had them, some didn't so the current thinking is that we will include these as separate fittings for those who wish to attach them after purchase. Also thanks for the comment about the step - we'll get this corrected! Cheers, Mike 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phatbob Posted November 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 16, 2012 With regard to the guard irons some vehicles had them, some didn't so the current thinking is that we will include these as separate fittings for those who wish to attach them after purchase. Thanks for that Mike. A cunning plan and It explains why I couldn't see them on the original CADs. Will there be an order form in the January mag? :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Thanks for that Mike. A cunning plan and It explains why I couldn't see them on the original CADs. Will there be an order form in the January mag? :-) No problems. We won't be taking orders just yet - we want to get the model progressed further and a more definitive date on arrival before we start taking orders. As soon as we are ready though there will be an order form in the magazine! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted November 16, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 16, 2012 (edited) Having built all kits but the Genisis kits* and scratchbuilt many more I feel that the overall height of the body is wrong. If you look at the photo in the link Mike (Stationmaster) has provided the height from the bottom of the front to the top of the "piano" lid top is 4 buffer beams high. The CAD it is just over five buffer beams high. It would be a great pity to get the height wrong. Mopok made their model too high by the same amount. As a very basic vac formed plastic moulding it was easy to alter but if the intended Hornby Magazine model is going to be of greater detail then It will not be easy to alter. I little suggestion, buy a Inter-city or ABS model to copy. Both are correct. Yours Clive *with only 120 built Hanging Hill have 10 already there was no need to make any of these. Edited November 16, 2012 by Clive Mortimore 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Having built all kits but the Genisis kits* and scratchbuilt many more I feel that the overall height of the body is wrong. If you look at the photo in the link Mike (Stationmaster) has provided the height from the bottom of the front to the top of the "piano" lid top is 4 buffer beams high. The CAD it is just over five buffer beams high. It would be a great pity to get the height wrong. Mopok made their model too high by the same amount. As a very basic vac formed plastic moulding it was easy to alter but if the intended Hornby Magazine model is going to be of greater detail then It will not be easy to alter. I little suggestion, buy a Inter-city or ABS model to copy. Both are correct. Yours Clive *with only 120 built Hanging Hill have 10 already there was no need to make any of these. Hi Clive, Thanks for comments about the overall height - it is something that we are currently checking as both Dave and myself felt that the model looked too tall overall. We'll be looking into this today to make the necessary amendments. Thanks, Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium CloggyDog Posted November 19, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 19, 2012 (edited) On the face of it, simply substituting Stanier bogies would produce Diagrams 1/556 and 1/557. Let the barrage commence !! Regards, John Isherwood. Sorry John, but the Stanier-bogied ones were some 2ft longer to accommodate the longer bogies. And the 2 1/557s (B964029/030) have long been alleged to ride on BR1 bogies (mentioned in various sources), though the BR diagram for 1/557 shows 9' wheelbase bogies. But under the shorter body, the outer ends of the LMS bogies would protrude almost ahead of the buffer faces?? I think the BR diagram is wrong A photo would solve the riddle, but neither '029 or '030 have appeared thus far. If anyone knows different... I've also just PM'd DD and MW the latest version of the Brake Tender piece I did for DEMU (which also appeared as an EMGS sheet, IIRC) as I'd like an accurate RTR model or three (especially if I could just drop EM wheels in! *he hinted*) Edited November 19, 2012 by CloggyDeux 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250BOB Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 (edited) I'm not interested in them - thankfully well out of period for me - but that latest CAD shows a distinct improvement in the curvature of the upper part, Eastern pattern lamps with Gresley bogies is a nice touch as is using Class 8 headcode; but it presumably means both ends will be lamped? The step on the bottom front of the bogie needs to be squared off - if possible - and there are no lifeguards, look at the pic on this link - http://www.flickr.co...610621/sizes/l/ The shape of the top of the bogies doesn't look quite right to me but that might be due to their pale colouring. No comment on bodyside detail as it did vary. Whats a lifeguard................as an ex swimming instructor, I'm sure I'd know one if I saw one. I've not heard of a lifeguard in relation to railways.?? But I'm sure I will soon. Bob. PS.....Well Done Hornby Magazine and Dapol............I'll be having one, and so will many others I'm sure.( with or without lifeguards) PPS...think I may have worked it out for myself......the metal bars pointing down at each rail..?? If thats them, I had no idea thats what they were called. Edited December 8, 2012 by 250BOB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted December 8, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 8, 2012 Whats a lifeguard................as an ex swimming instructor, I'm sure I'd know one if I saw one. I've not heard of a lifeguard in relation to railways.?? But I'm sure I will soon. Bob. PS.....Well Done Hornby Magazine and Dapol............I'll be having one, and so will many others I'm sure.( with or without lifeguards) PPS...think I may have worked it out for myself......the metal bars pointing down at each rail..?? If thats them, I had no idea thats what they were called. Well done Bob - you've worked it out correctly (but don't ask me why they're called lifeguards although I can see a bit of sense in the term). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Morning All, Much has been happening in the background with this project correcting details, sorting the body profile and height and checking and rechecking measurements. Below is a selection of images from the very latest CAD/CAM drawing which is pretty much there now - although the brake shoes are missing from this version, but will be replaced. As always your comments are welcome - we want to make sure this model is correct before we hit the big green tooling button! Thanks, Mike 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250BOB Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Just one comment.........."Hurry up, I cant wait."!!!! Bob 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250BOB Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Well Mike.......it must absolute perfection judging by the response to your question above. I should get on and hit that big green button. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike wild Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Afternoon all! Below are the latest CAD/CAM drawings of the diesel brake tender with a few more revisions including reinstatement of the brake shoes. We are currently looking at providing optional guard irons and three and four spoke handbrake wheels to offer a little customisation to the model. Enjoy! Mike 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted March 6, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 6, 2013 Hi Mike I have just taken the side and end views of the CAD and I overlaied the BR diagrams 1/555 and 1/556 over them. The body is still too high. The buffers are too wide apart. And I think you have placed Gresley bogies under a 1/556 body as I cannot get the bogies and body to line up. The 1/556 had LMS bogies and a longer body because the bogies are longer. The 1/555 had a shorter body and Gresley bogies. The body is too long for a diagram 1/555. The radius of the body top does not match that of the BR diagrams. For the BR diagrams http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/BRFreight2Issue.pdf 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Hi Mike I have just taken the side and end views of the CAD and I overlaied the BR diagrams 1/555 and 1/556 over them. The body is still too high. The buffers are too wide apart. And I think you have placed Gresley bogies under a 1/556 body as I cannot get the bogies and body to line up. The 1/556 had LMS bogies and a longer body because the bogies are longer. The 1/555 had a shorter body and Gresley bogies. The body is too long for a diagram 1/555. The radius of the body top does not match that of the BR diagrams. For the BR diagrams http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/BRFreight2Issue.pdf Mike / DapolDave, I have been concerned as to the provenance of this proposed model from the day that it was announced; see my posts 17 & 24 in this thread. It has been suggested that the BR diagrams may not accurately reflect what was actually built, but it would help us to make constructive comment if we knew which BR diagram the model is meant to represent. Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium CloggyDog Posted March 6, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 6, 2013 (edited) I have 4 BR diagrams: 1/555 Short/Gresley - 32'6" over buffers, Gresley 8'6" bogies at 15'3" centres, Lot 3446 (which would be valid only for DE320922/B964036 Cowlairs 1961) but 1/555 also covers B964038-105/112-121 which is bourne out by photographic evidence. The lower bodyside has a tumblehome.1/556 Long/Stanier - 35'6" over buffers, Stanier 9' bogies at 15'3" centres. Lot 3442 B964000-4, Lot 3443 B964005-19, Part Lot 3444 B964020-028, part lot 3445 B964031-34, all bourne out by photos. Lower bodyside is flat.1/557 Short/Stanier? - 32'6" over buffers, Stanier 9' bogies at 15'3" centres. Part Lot 3444 B964029, Part Lot 3445 B964030. However... I've seen at least 3 references which report that these were actually on 8'6" BR1 bogies (the BR Mk1 coach bogie) but this is unproven by photographic evidence.1/558 - the 6 angular tenders built by Stratford works, 31'9" over buffers, 8' Gresley bogies at 15' centres. Lot 3449 B964106-111Basically you should not use the same body for Gresley and Stanier bogies, there's a 3' difference in length as well as the tumblehome/flat side issue.I can't see the new CAD drawings (that's TfL's wonderful internet filters for you), so will comment further when I see them at home this evening. Edited March 6, 2013 by CloggyDeux Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve O. Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Hi Gents, Itchy credit card trigger-finger... Any date we can pre-order? Cheers, Steve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 (edited) Hi peeps Proving cad and asking for feedback is good but you are actually asking us to hunt arround for pictures to compare them too in roughly the same angles. Since the cad can be posed at any angles can I ask that you find a load of prototype pictures and post them while at the same time posing the cad at the same angle so that we can compare? As mentioned in the western thread, CAD without a comparible prototype image is pretty useless really and we dont want to end up in the same place where the only real comparrison pictures are those posed by modellers once the model is released. Cheers Jim Edited March 6, 2013 by jim s-w 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold DaveF Posted March 7, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 7, 2013 A few of my brake tender images, some have been in other threads previously. Hope they are of interest. David 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold DaveF Posted March 7, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 7, 2013 A few more: Pilmoor D6777 up goods March 67 J783 David 9 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