Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

37 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. And these are my attempts at weathering ... The started out as TOPS set J. I've swapped in P4 wheels, but haven't yet had a chance to run them on someone else's layout to see whether or not they will run acceptably without springing or compensation. David
  2. It’s not you ... Trains now creep into the platforms and right along to the ends. Last minute changes of platform, often after the train has arrived, are the norm rather than the exception. I stood at the far end of platform 12 with the relief driver of my train home to Exeter St David’s tonight as we watched it come in on 6. It was the same the night before, and doubtless will be tomorrow. It’s now so far to walk that it was a good 10 minutes before everyone had got on the train. That’s enough for a train to lose its path. I’ve decided to loiter in the tunnel until the train arrives. Big sigh ... David
  3. Thank you all for your encouragement. I stole a few moments this evening to strip down the rods and check the quartering. Nothing seemed amiss, but when I put it back together, it ran very sweetly. I hadn’t opened up the holes in the rods at all, so there wasn’t the slightest room for the quartering to be out, so that was presumably the problem. Next step is to put the motor and gearbox in ... Best wishes David
  4. Thank you Mike and jrg1. I regret not using the compensation method designed into the kit and will undoubtedly do so in the next Judith Edge kit that I build. I had misunderstood quite how it works, but your photograph makes it wonderfully clear. I should have had more confidence in my ability and not been so cautious as to rely on conventional three-point suspension. I am certainly really pleased with the way that the kit has gone together. The body now has a coat of primer, which hides the deficiencies in my soldering. I suspect that I may be worrying unnecessarily and that all I need to do is to check the quartering of the jack shaft. I'll check the distances with my calipers this evening, although knowing the quality of Mike's design work, I am very confident that the distance between centres on the rear rod will match perfectly the diagonal distance between the rear axle and jackshaft centres. It shouldn't matter that the jack shaft is slightly higher than the main axle as long as the length is correct. I haven't opened up the holes in the rods at all beyond the diameter of the crankpins, so maybe it is not surprising that I have a slight bind. Thank you! David
  5. Ah! I thought that you would have mentioned it if you had encountered a problem. The problem is that the centre of the jack shaft axle lies a fraction higher than the line between the centres of the two main axles. It is certainly meant to; although it isn’t noticeable in any photographs, Mike’s drawing that comes with the instructions shows it this way. I first noticed it when I tried to set up the frames in my Avonside jig and realised that the three axles are not quite colinear. That means that the rod will be very slightly shorter than necessary. Looking back at some of the photos of your build, it does look like your rod to the jack shaft is not quite in line with the main rod. That gives me the confidence to open out the holes just slightly to allow for the difference. I feel happier doing that with a jack shaft than with a driving wheel. Thanks for your advice and support! David
  6. I am sorry to hijack another of your threads. Inspired by your build of the industrial version, I have been working on a P4 model of one of the second batch of North British 330 hp shunters for British Railways. Once finished, it will be D2913, which spent a few weeks on trial at Nuneaton in January 1960 and had an extended exhaust pipe. The kit has gone together beautifully. The photo shows progress so far. Like you, I opted to compensate the front axle. I didn’t initially understand the compensation designed into the kit, preferring to fix the rear axle to preserve the distance to the jack shaft. But ... the jack shaft axle isn’t quite in line with the two main axles. The difference means that the rods bind slightly. How did you accommodate this in your build? Did you just open out the holes on the rear rod and rely on a bit of slop? Best wishes David
  7. Thank you! I don't think that I've outgrown the functionality of my Compact yet, so I'm relieved to know that I won't have to upgrade just yet.
  8. I am currently using a Lenz Compact and wonder if it might be time to upgrade. I switched to DCC because of the improved running, and not because of the additional features such as lighting and sound. However, I am very tempted by the new SLW class 24 and can see that the Zimo MX645/633 decoder with which it is fitted has lots of extra facilities. Will my Lenz Compact be able to cope with such an advanced decoder? I'm not concerned if I can't access all of the functions, but rather whether I could operate the locomotive at all. Would I have to upgrade now?
  9. I don't want to inflame the discussion any further, but the ex-Acorn etched brass kit is still available from Mercian Models. Furthermore, they currently have them on special offer at £38 for two. David
  10. dmsmith


    Whilst reading Trevor Mann's article on Covhops in the June edition of Rail Express Modeller, I was intrigued to notice the photograph of B886007 in unfitted grey livery with British Industrial Sand markings taken in 1980. This is one of the first batch of 10 wagons built to lot 2375 in 1952. The wagon has a tie bar between the w irons. Interestingly, there is a works photograph of exactly the same wagon on Paul Bartlett's excellent site, which shows that when built, it didn't have the tie bar. I haven't seen any other photographs of Covhops with tie bars. Was this one unique? David
  11. I had completely missed your earlier thread on the 4 mm version of these hoppers, so am grateful that you provided a link. Both versions look superb! Did you end up making the etches fir the 4 mm versions available? I'd certainly be very interested if you did. David
  12. Dear Adam, I'm glad that you like them! I'm also grateful for confirming my belief that the baulks, as I have modelled them, are too small. These aren't for any project in particular. I just liked your conversions so much that I thought that I'd have a go myself. I do have a few P4 turnouts on a bit of baseboard, but much of my modelling these days centres on building things to run on other people's layouts. I am fortunate to know fellow modellers who are are more productive than me. I just don't know anyone round here who models BR in South Wales in the 1970s ... David
  13. I hope that Adam will forgive my hijacking his thread. However, I was so inspired by his Coil J conversions from Hornby Iron Ore tipplers that I wanted to make some for myself in P4. The Hornby tipplers are excellent value in packs of three from Hattons, and I still have the upper halves of the bodies to turn into sand tipplers. The Hornby chassis is remarkably fine, so I have chosen to leave it as it is and do without either springing or compensation. The internal timbers are a little small; I had relied upon the dimensions quoted in Keith Allen's Railway Modeller article from January 1983 and sourced some walnut wood section from my local model shop, but I may yet try to find something slightly larger. I now need to work out the dimensions of the coils themselves to make some loads. As ever, Paul Bartlett's excellent photographs provided inspiration for the weathering. The rust effect was achieved by spraying a base coat of Tamiya grey primer, followed by a sprinking of salt fixed with Testor's Dullcote and the oversprayed with Tamiya Flat Brown. Transfers are from Fox, finished off with more Dullcote. Finally, I gave everything a dusting with Carr's weathering powders. David
  14. Have only just found your thread, and am pleased that I have done as it has inspired me to think about a few new projects. I certainly like the idea of backdating the Bachmann BDA rather than using the Cambrian kit or scratch building the underframe in brass angle. Not all of the unfitted Bogie Bolster D's had the triangulare gussets on the Bachmann model, but it looks like the best route to a vacuum-fitted version. I am assuming that the Bachmann bolsters are just glued in place and may be removed quite easily with a scalpel ...? David
  15. Thank you! I don't feel quite so foolish, now that I find others don't have an obvious solution. I am modelling to a time constraint (Scaleforum, in a few weeks), so will probably go with a modified Bachmann version for the time being, but keep my eyes open for an alternative in the long run. David
  • 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.