Jump to content

Headstock

Members
  • Content Count

    2,897
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7,682 Excellent

3 Followers

Profile Information

  • Location
    Back on the rails

Recent Profile Visitors

966 profile views
  1. Evening Jonathan, thanks for the image. There is no switching gear on the brake end of the GC/GN East midlands allocation, as shown on the Isinglass drawing. You can just about make out the details on a couple of photographs of the other end. The box is not mounted as outboard as your example.
  2. This is a close crop of a M D Marston photo, courtesy of David Web. It's the photo I used, that seems to show a box outside of the queen post. There is possibly a second box, to the right and in a bit, from the furthest queen post on the composite. For comparison, I include a crop of what seems to be the more typical arrangement.
  3. Afternoon Jonathan I wasn't in any way questioning whether you were right. I just wish to make it clear that this is not my opinion, rather fact than can be checked by anybody who wishes to do so. I haven't settled on a location for the regulator box (I need to make them first) but I did register your finding that there was only one per twin. Just to clarify, I could only find evidence of a regulator box on one carriage in a Dia. 210 twin, so I only fitted one, thinking I could fit a second as information became available. That's not quite the sa
  4. Good afternoon Jonathan, a couple of things please. 'Andrew reckons first class was reinstated after the unpleasantness' There are plenty of photographs showing first class designation on the relevant compartments in post war days. This is confirmed by the contemporary CWN's, they record the relevant first class seating arrangements. 'My photos aren't great but they do show some sort of box on the outer composite end'. I original fitted a regulator box outside the queen post on the BT, as this appears to be the arrangement in one phot
  5. Good morning Jonathan, the isinglass drawing has quite a few errors, the arrangement of the vertical beading for example. The composites were declassified during the war, however, Isinglass fails to mention that they reverted to type after the cessation of hostilities.
  6. Last year I built and painted one of the Masterclass models dia 210 twins. Having acquired a another kit, I'm currently building a second twin, that will form a four carriage set with the first. They will represent the 12.03 pm Leicester Rugby ordinary passenger train working. Below is the BT (6) showing it's underbelly, still to is the vac pipe that runs down the solebar on the far side under the underframe and the steam heat pipe. Critical to any twin, is that the two carriages align horizontally. The steel ruler is taped to the sides for the
  7. Evening Bps, very cool and aesthetically pleasing. I see that you've gone for the clipped buffers after all.
  8. Afternoon Bucoops, I don't bother too much with trying to extrapolating measurements from photographs, the mind is easily mislead. There is about a 1 mm gap on my BG, perhaps half the distance on yours, perhaps a bit more. That is close enough to the the GA numbers and measurements taken from the surviving underframe , plus bogies, of a GN Milk van, that was at the GCR some years ago. I have also done the same with the ex Royal train BG in the NRM. I'm sure you could reduce the ride height, it won't affect the minimum curve that you can negotiate. The main thing is, whatever you c
  9. I don't put a great deal of trust in manufactures to get things right for me. My bolster arrangement is quite simple, a block of laminated plasticard gives a nice broad bearing surface. The laminations, in combination with the availability of different thicknesses of plasticard, allow for infinite adjustability in ride height. Below is the arrangement on the BT (6), part of the 210 combo. A simple solution, that can be standardized across a whole range of carriages, to insure a consistent ride height on those needing it but also accommodating the variations found on the real thing.
  10. Good morning Bucoops, the gap between the solebars and the fox bogies looks a bit extravagant. I usually fit my own homemade bolster to most carriages, that way I have total control over ride height on individual carriages and a formation. It's crucial for twins and other articulated carriages. The D&S ECJS full brake Below employs this method, the gap is nearer scale and the wheels (Gibson) will not catch the underframe.
  11. Evening John, Many ranges of kits have shown great promise over the years, but failed for similar reasons to those aflicking this range. Unlike Kirk, another not so accurate set of kits, they are not that cheap, compared to other options. Two many people take the position that we should be grateful, not I, not when I'm paying for my gratitude. Many kits are sold over the years but only a small percentage are ever built, often by people not that familiar with the prototype. Because of this, It can take years to realise that the manufacturer is also not that familiar with
  12. Evening Andy, The GNR milk van was about 4 inches taller than a Gresley LNER carriage, I don't know about Pullman, without digging out a book, presumably they complied with the ECJS or LNER composite loading gauge. You have probably added at least an inch in height at the cornice, as the roof should sit down more. The gap between the solebar and the Fox bogies looks to be far too big. Perhaps as much as 2 mm or more. Your wheels also look suspiciously like RTR Hornby? If so, they are a little overscale but presumably match the pullman.
  13. John, you even get a free W1. It's a good one for the owners of Hornby Gangway Gresleys. They need to retract their buffers, so that the Buckeyes and Pullman gangways, with their own buffing gear,can be deployed.
  14. Evening John, no way on that one, the kit is obviously not designed to do that and given the brittleness, too easily damaged. Prising things on and off is asking for trouble, not to mention super lazy modeling. A good solid bracket and a nut and bolt is a proper job. I don't like the shape of the headstock on the Isinglass underframe, it looks nothing like the real thing. It is as if it was produced by someone who had only seen a side on drawing and was unaware of how it looks in three dimensions. It could be replaced I suppose. Colour coded for clarity
  15. Thanks for the information John, In comparison to Andy's Gangway ends, I take it you have filed back the 'ledge' that you mention, in order to get a sharper edge were the ends intersect the sides? The roof also seems to be a better fit to the ends as a result. I probably wouldn't use the underframes as supplied, the headstocks don't look right and the solebars lack detail. I'm wondering if the body would fit on an MJT underframe? What is the width across the assembled body, from inside wall to inside wall? If I was to use the underframe, I would remove the clip in bit
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.