Jump to content
 

Frankenpannier II


richbrummitt

540 views

Following discussions on the previous entry I reasoned to construct a cab before making a decision about the tanks being close enough to the right size or completely unusable. I also went looking for a suitable engine in RCTS i.e. one that would have the potential to be on the lines of the ex. B&HER, on which more another time. The 645 and 655 class were originally Wolverhampton engines and most of them stayed 'North'. From locomotive allocations I've got 769 and 1804 at Bristol, which is a close to the B&HER as I can get. 1801 and 2701 were at Severn Tunnel Jcn. Of these the Severn Tunnel Jcn. engines were the first to have panniers but not until 1920. 1804 didn't receive them until 1926 - a little late for me - but 769 was adorned such at the end of 1922. That's in my post WWI to start of grouping modelling period and hopefully avoids me going full scratch build to create a saddle tank! According to RCTS 769 also had top feed at some point. Arrgh: I already filed this off the tanks I've got left over from the Farish body I've now discarded most off. 

 

Looking at plenty of drawings and pictures of the cab the first thing that struck me was that compared to the cabs on engines in the Churchward era the side profile of the cabs is very much different. I made up a new file for the milling machine and after much head scratching to work out why I wasn't getting sensible output from the stepper motors I eventually got some new cab side sheets cut out. For some reason the tool list in my CAM software had replaced itself and I was trying to run at a feed of 15000mm/min, something the motors just won't keep up with, rather than around 120. This should have been really obvious when reading the .nc file, but I also had a duff version of the file I was comparing to with speeds that would also cause a huge number of skipped steps. I cut and filed up a cab front, soldered in position, and cut another large chunk of the Farish body away (the portion inside the cab and bunker) so that it could all fit together. The cab spectacles are probably a little undersize. I haven't found a definitive dimension and it's much easier to make them larger than try and put some metal back!

 

20190920_090420.jpg.0316e82374209cedfaad44474a3e1b42.jpg

20190920_090407.jpg.61afb0d4d7f827b26a3cc82a8d6d0198.jpg

 

The chimney - which was the incorrect tapered type - has been removed and the tanks lowered. This means that at present the body no longer fits on the chassis; the motor mount fouls the inside top of the tanks. Comparing with pictures the raised firebox on the 57xx was new with pannier tanks for that time. It was off with the safety valve cover, which didn't survive being centre popped out of the fixing hole, and more filing to get the firebox closer to flush.

 

20190924_173822.jpg.dc084166580993faa71eacac2338906f.jpg

 

I am starting to wonder if the tank top with the plate over the tanks is representative of pannier tanks of the early 1920s. I've also filed back the cover for the lubricating? pipework into the smokebox and the tank vents. Oh, to find an above view. Maybe it is better to carry on in ignorance? I'll need to do a new smokebox door in time regardless because the moulded one is too flat, and quite possibly should be the earlier style with a dished front and a circular rim/border.

 

Whilst I continue to search in books (I've gone through several likely tomes off my shelves without finding anything yet) there are plenty of other things that this engine will need. One such prominent item is the bunker. I followed some dimensions from drawings but couldn't reconcile the width with pictures. I'm absolutely convinced that the bunker at it's narrowest is as wide as the cab and the flares protrude beyond that profile even though the dimensioned drawing of a bunker I was looking at, presumably for the original bunker size, has a width much less. Did they get wider with time? They definitely got larger in other respects. I hope that I don't need to remake this narrower later on.

 

I made the bunker from etch waste. I always save the edge pieces. The lower portion was made first with two parallel bends made in a precision vice, carefully measured to be the correct separation to create a bunker the same width as the cab. The sides were made overlong and then made to length after bending. The flare was made, again held in the vice, by gripping with smooth jawed pliers around a 3.5mm drill bit to create the large radius curve. I've not made such a shape before and had read that the corners a tricky many times. I concur they are interesting for all the reasons I've read about. I cut a front and fixed it in place to make a rectangular tube and soldered it onto the footplate in the correct place. The extension was made in a similar way but bent with an increased corner radius and width to match the size of the flared bunker top. Copious amounts of solder were added here - something that's easy to do with multicore - to allow for material to file back and hide any small gaps, especially on the aforementioned corners where there are some tears from forming the flare. The sides are trimmed to length and shaped after fixing.

 

20190927_224703.jpg.7640e80e6ad812a1b66cfee5bac78913.jpg

 

The cut out visible in the cab front is to clear the worm gear, which just protrudes into the cab but should be hidden well enough by the backhead.

 

A couple more pictures of the current status. Rat tale files have been used to clean up the excess solder and finish the corner shape. Whilst I'm still looking for that photograph that shows the tank tops there are still plenty more jobs around the footplate to be getting on with, and I need to create a new motor mount to allow the lowered tanks to fit over the chassis.

 

20190927_230106.jpg.e64fa35ba197e7d7d1dd19515ea14ed0.jpg

20190927_230122.jpg.63dac3220c66b8673ff44cc6ff05b986.jpg

  • Like 4
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2

11 Comments


Recommended Comments

I don't think I've encountered a topfeed on a pre-1942 P class boiler, but if 769 did have a topfeed, it would have been one with a small cover, but a cover that had a flatter bottom (compared to that fitted on untanked boilers, as per this Dean Goods):

2483.jpg.95c85a1f0e1e7896afe61b8cae0172fa.jpg

 

Tank tops - not quite sure what a 645 pannier tank top would look like, but it was probably closer to a 1854 top than a 57xx top, the latter having a slightly more pronounced bump in the boiler.

 

Your bunker looks good.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

Clarification - pre-1942 top feeds probably didn't have covers. (But I'm still sceptical about one on a P class boiler.)

 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment

RCTS just says that 769 was one of not many to be so fitted, but without a date. It seems safe to assume that it was a (much) later addition. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

When was 769 withdrawn?

 

 

April 1930. The P class B4 boiler and pannier tanks in 1922 was the last boiler change, according to RCTS. 

Link to comment

I've been looking at the page with that picture on all this time too! Where are the top feed pipes routed - straight out of the cab front above the tanks? If so is 1673 (two images above) also so fitted? There is something immediately behind the tank fillers and there doesn't appear to be anything actually behind the engine, as is so often the case. If not then what is that pipe for? 

 

An unrelated question: what dictated the position of the tank vents? It seems to me to be arbitrary between two locations, front (as on 1693) or rear (as on 1693).

Link to comment
4 hours ago, richbrummitt said:

I've been looking at the page with that picture on all this time too! Where are the top feed pipes routed - straight out of the cab front above the tanks?

 

That's what I was looking for as well!!!! My feeling is that the feed pipes do not go along the top of the tank, a la classical later 57xx, but go straight down the sides of the boiler, like the arrangement in the Dean Goods pic above. The only other class I can think of having pre-1940 topfeeds is the 2021 class, and even so they were extremely rare. I will need to modify my 1693 picture caption.

 

I don't think 1673 is topfeed fitted. The thing behind the filler is the filler lid bouncer (or whatever it was officially called).

 

1673-filler-lid-bouncer.jpg.7ea918e035aa17a7c99ee54d296ad8d4.jpg

 

The pipe visible in the 1673 pic is I think the lubricator or blower pipe. Usually, these were hidden under the tanktops.

 

Tank vents seem to be fairly standard, about a foot or so to the rear of the filler, but 1673 is clearly non-standard.

 

Edited by Miss Prism
Link to comment

Not relevant to a model but would that require the tanks to be modified to have the space for the top feed? Though istr. tanks and boilers tended to remain together so once modified it would not be a recurring problem fitting tanks to a top feed boiler.

 

It's obvious now you tell me that the lid stop (something else for me to add) is what I was looking at. It was this detail on the picture of 1693 that made me wonder if there was a pipe exiting the cab on each side. This isn't visible elsewhere that I recall seeing and is not on the image of 2772 above.Screenshot_20190929-205201_Edge.jpg.a6750db98bf9aa6b5b67923acc0dc949.jpg

 

There are other pictures of engines with vents in a rear position including 1815 and 1747 on the GWR.org.uk/nopanniers page.

Edited by richbrummitt
Link to comment
1 hour ago, richbrummitt said:

Not relevant to a model but would that require the tanks to be modified to have the space for the top feed?

 

I don't think so. There was usually plenty of room between the top of the tanks and the boiler, so piping (for lubricator and blower) could go into the space,

 

pannier-boiler-adjunct.gif.e717bb6bd1a8865d80ce8b3143f5a4cd.gif

 

 

Quote

It was this detail on the picture of 1693 that made me wonder if there was a pipe exiting the cab on each side. This isn't visible elsewhere that I recall seeing and is not on the image of 2772 above.

 

The lubricator pipe cover at the cab end was I think always, or at least usually, on the right-hand side, as per this detail pic of 7714, because the lubricator and blower pipe cover was always on the rhs of the smokebox.

 

7714-lubricator-pipe-cover-cab.jpg.c22b70b18e22d899d67bbd4d6cbc66ee.jpg

 

So I'm not sure what that thing/cab hole is on the left-hand side of 1693. It is just possible it is one of the boiler feed pipes (with the other on the right-hand side), but why go into the cab when their destination is the injectors below the tank?

 

Quote

There are other pictures of engines with vents in a rear position including 1815 and 1747 on the GWR.org.uk/nopanniers page.

 

There are always exceptions. The difficult thing to judge is whether they are class exceptions or just unusual exceptions within the class.

 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment

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
×
×
  • Create New...