rue_d_etropal

I decided to have a break, so had another look at this. I have come up with a modular version, so any wheelbase can be created. Simple slot the axle holders onto the beam(cut to suitable length), then just ad bearings and loco wheels. The longer axle support is for gears to be fitted. It might be possible to creat some sort of cradle to hold motor, and this cradle could then slot into the top of the chassis beam. Just waiting to get a test sample. The package will have one long beam, 3 supports for wheels with gears, and 10 axle supports for non geared wheels. Should be enough for 2-3 locos.

just completed questionaire. I think it possibly slants too far towards the cautious. When considering the future you have to balance positive and negative consequences, In medical research theysay that the benefits of any treatment have to outweight the downsides(my father used to work in Cancer research and always sad yo could essily kill a cancer, but in most cases that would also kill the patient, so most of the research was on how to not kill the patient). With this pandemic, there have been far too many downsides, such as the mental effect on some people. In the future we will have to balance downsides such as that against the possible medical effects of returning to normality. I am a mathematician by training and have a certain undersyanding about systems, and how statisticas can be misused. The way numbers have been pumped out over past year personally offends me from a mathematicians perspective, and as a result I don't trust most of the statistics. To put it bluntly if someone presented a scientific paper with this type of evidence, I would throw it in the bin straight away. I am in my 60s, have had both jabs, and did have a dose of C19 back in November 2019, before it was officially recognised here, I know because my wife had the classic loss of taste and smell symptoms. I mentioned this to my brother who has only just retired as a GP, and he was pretty certain it was C19. I also know what it is like to lose a member of my family, having lost my oldest child to cancer a few years ago, far more painfull than when my parents died. I said the questionaire slants towards the cautious. For me any exhibitions which put in any of the restrictions suggested would not get me visiting.

I was just as surprised myself , but it does actually work. Just as long as you use a decent primer first. Acryllic paint does not properly harden for a couple of days at least, so any similar(eg emulsion) paint will bind to it better . I don't know why but grey primer is better than white. Even basic matt grey acryllic paint brushed on will bind to plastic better than same make matt white. When I was runnning shop, I messed around with painting various models, which is also how I came up with the gunge jar for weathering. My ideas are not just theory, I have been actually practising them for over 10 years. One big advantage is that emulsion paint and other DIY paints can be bought from most DIY/hardware stores, and you can even get specific mixes in bigger DIY stores. Odd thing is lack of GWR type green in standard ranges, so I mixed myown, but it should be possible toget the correct mixture code in DIY stores, so same shades can be repeated. It is all too easy to just follow established methods, but being truly creative for me means thinking outside of the box and trying new methods. Unfortunately the model railway hobby seems to be stuck in its ways and anyone challenging those ways is deemed suspect. Military modellers switched from enamels to acrylic paints many years ago, I have just taken the idea to next stage.

I assumed track was actually HO scale, so sleeper spacing would match that, ie every 7mm as per code 100 track. I have noticed that Peco code 83 is actually 6mm spacing to suit USA standard. Odd thing is that the old Hornby Dublo OO track(final series ) is 8mm spacing, and actually looks better for OO scale. It is always going to be a compromise when you use 16.5mm gauge for 4mm scale, wich is why I now tend to match track to scale I am modelling in. I tend to try and find supplies of old HD track as well as old Formaway and GEM trackd for 4mm scale, and am now looking at using code 83 for 3mm scale broad gauge.

I thought there were translations available online.

I have found that once the plastic is primed, and the Halfords grey is best spray paint, although I have found most matt grey acryllic paints seem to work well, even applied by brush, then any water based paint such as emulsion(match pots from DIY shops) will stick OK. Applying a coat of garden/DIY type acryllic will toughen it, but as most buildings are not handled that much, then it is not necessary. Finally I apply a gung mix which is the water used to clean my brushes and it still contains quite a lot of paint, and costs nothing. I let gravity take the gung to where it would have naturally formed on any building.

Just re-opening this thread. Having got as far as I could with research on Cf de Camargue, and finally getting hold of a copy of the book written over 10 years ago. There wasn't much new for me, but there was a photo of a Crochat loco and (salt?) wagons in the book, but no mention where it was taken. I presume it is in ths saltworks in the Camargue not the Midi. Also it looks like it has an open cab. The railway is described only as a 'Decauville' one, but that is often the general name given to narrow gauge lines like this, and loco is not a Decauville built one. Now I remember on one of the discussions here, and also I think I found something also online, a mention of these locos being transported to other salt works. I think there was a mention of one further along the coast towards the Camargue, but maybe they also were used on the Camargue salt works line. If these locos were indeed used on the Camargue system, then it would be an amazing coincidence for me, as before I got interested oin the CF de Camargue,I was searching for info on the metre gauge lines near to Narbonne. I think I have found more info. I have a copy of Industrial Locomotives of South Western France, and it i in here that it mentions the movements of these locos. As book is about south western France, it is possible there were other saltworks , which would be covered ib South Eastern copy . I have a fealing I have that copy somewhere. just found copy, and it only mentions metre gauge being used by the Camargue saltworks, which does not explain the inclusion of a photo of a crochat loco in the Camargue book. There is a photo of a Crochat and salt wagons. Again loco seems to either have open cab or none at all, but it is not clear which saltworks as it could be Salines du Djibouti at Frontignan.

I wonder, who knows what is in some ballast? Many years ago I built one of my annual exhibition layouts using LGB brass track. As ballast is big in big scales, I used some ballast from a local garden centre. I think it might have been from the fish tank department. I used my normal method of using diluted PVA glue,and when it was dry, everythng short circuited, and only way to fix it was to remove the ballast and replace . The replacement ballast(model railway supply?) worked perfectly, no problems, but the brass rail showed signs of some type of chemical reaction . I assumed there must be something in the original ballast the conducted electricity, possibly only when it was in contact with PVA glue, as that is known to react with some metals. I have used varous ballasts since, many from pet/garden centres and no problem .

The Metropolitan switched steam and electric locos at Rickmansworth, and it took no longer than normal station stop.

Not sure about rail transport. but some of the French tanks fitted on backs of lorries, as they were not that big.

my impression is that charge should only be the VAT(20%) plus admin charge, which I personnally think should be scrapped, even if in the end it means VAT being put up slightly. Admin charges are a licence to print money, as they seem to vary a lot. Governments should pay 'tax collectors; , not the person receiving the item. I tend to try and keep my orders, such as they are,under the £135 limit.

another deal starts today

I think that might have been me on the gNatterbox, as I did have one of the first of the T gauge sets. It almost got more interest than the lyout I was exhibiting at the time!, I difd not do anything in 1/6, but did build a small layout in 1/12, using the T gauge on model tables, to represent O or G1 .I eventually dismantled it and sold off the T gauge. Another scale/gauge combination might be using the super sharp radius system(Rokuhan) for Z gauge, and use a scale of 1/55 or 5.5mm/ft, as this comes close to15in gauge. I built a small working layout in a cakebox.

all it needs is a block based on the Bachmann/Mainline one, without the side weights. As it would be plastic it would be necessary to add pickups,and I think the later versions had a better axle which made fitting wheels easier. Alternatively someone bravely cutting up one of these chassis. I did look aound to see if I could find a chassis(or complete loco) cheap, but oddly prices have gone up since the new version was released. If I was going for a fancy chassis, I would probably opt for this one https://www.wizardmodels.ltd/shop/locomotive/lcp33/

my designs are done in one piece, not a collection of bits, called a kit. That is the big advantage of 3D printing, but it does mean adapting to a specific chassis is not an option. I wonder if there is a smaller motor which with a suitable cradle could be fitted to Terrier. There are some designs which would uit this chassis, but a better loco size is one which would fit a J72 chassis as that then covers most standard 0-6-0 locos. If someone was to design such a chassis then it might be worth my time designing bodies to fit. I am less interested in designing locos, but will do those that are of interest to me and I think others might be interested. Most of my designs are done for at least 6 different scales. My main interest is coaches and railcars, and I have a long list of ones I want to do, and already have the drawings.

motor is only potential problem as it is a few mm too far one way,and might be slightly too high.

I can only look at old Dapol chassis. it might be worth looking at the new Hornby or Raoils versions, but obviously they cost more. Another loco might actually be a J72 in HO, as this could fit on Terrier chassis. On the whole, tender locos are going to be far easier to motorize, with motor in tender. I am currently working on a design for an A4 , as someone wanted one in a big scale.

that drawing is ok, scales up nicely/ will add it to list. Looks pretty close to size of J72, I am sure I have seen the J72 converted into one. redid that drawing to HO, and chassis is nearer to Terrier not the J72. I tried chassis up against drawing and it almost fits,- wheels OK, but motor not quite.

these might be of interest http://www.rue-d-etropal.com/3D-printing/passenger-stock-sr/3d_printed_SR_Night_Ferry.htm

I tend toonly do a few locos, mainly interested in railcars and coaches, but if there are scale drawingsI can have a look. The problem with the J72 model, both Bachmann and original Mainline is the side tank weights. The new Bachmann model has part of the boiler fixed to chassis under the motor which is a shame. For any tender loco I would probably use a motorized tender, but tricky for any tank loco.

David , just contact Mark, and he should be able to do a bespoke chassis. He might want the actual body sending to him. Something like this railcar might have even more interest if it is known there is a chassis available.

The question of axle boxes comes up quite often, My suggested way is to use an internal support/bearing for the axle, and not worry about fitting axles heds into axle boxes. If a complete dummy chassis is put together it can be removed easier from body, and can be tested separately, even non powered wagons and coaches. For motorized chassis I suggest contacting Mark at Locos n Stuff, as he has done his own 3D printed working chassis for some of my models.

It is odd that it is now easier to do resrarch , because of the internet, but people now want to be spoon fed information. I recently started putting website links on my 3D printed listings, as I felt it was more reliable than me rewriting the same information on my listing. Not perfect, as I do notice errors on websites, and websites do disappear sometimes. All I do is do a simple Google search whch takes next to no time, and record the website address. Maybe a link to a website with all relevant info , possible that link only via manufacturer's own website, rather than link being printed on information sheets with the model. Trouble is , what ever system you use to catalogue different items, someone will always ask for it to be done slightly differnt to suit them . I think some companies are tempted to try and add as many category types as possible, but this then leads to overly complex databases which eventually grind themselves into the ground. Searches beome more complex, and more often return incorrect results, and it would be a lot easier for everyone to keep the system simple in the first place.

Shapeways have an American base, but it started in the Netherlands and is still based there. I believe the overall system(website etc) is under control of American company, and the operation in Netherlands sort of works as a sub contractor. Designers like me are based all over the world, I do the KESR stuff, and I am based in the UK. When you order an item, you are dealing with Shapeways not the designer, and the designer gets in effect a commission on the sale. I have noticed postage is costing more, but then look at any international post, apart from that from China, and it has been getting more expensive over past few years.

suppose it should be a new thread, but this has evolved out of the 16t design. Had a request for a 9ft and 10ft wagon chassis, and it made sence to use the one I had designed for the 16ton wagon with a couple of mods. details here http://www.rue-d-etropal.com/3D-printing/3d_printed_sg-trains3.htm