Jump to content
 

JDaniels

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    132

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by JDaniels

  1. JDaniels

    GWR 517 0-4-2T

    By JDaniels,

    I'm thinking of constructing another 517 0-4-2T to work alongside the M &L kit I already have. I was contemplating the Malcolm Mitchell kit but really wanted something that would not take as long to construct and I'm also a little put off by comments that on some of these kits the boiler has to be rolled. I've since read reports that SE Finecast are supposed to have produced a kit for this locomotive but although it appears in the price list, I've yet to find a photo of it.
     
    The M & L kit represents the short framed, inside rear bearing version of the 517 which, by the 1920's were quite rare, most having been converted with a longer frame and outside rear bearings. Does anyone know which version the SE Finecast kit represents?
     
    I have a SE Finecast kit of the GWR Metro tank and the quality and fit of the castings is outstanding. The kits also come with a detailed etched chassis.
     
    I'd be grateful if anyone has more information on this kit which I can imagine will be very popular.
  2. JDaniels

    Westbrook

    By JDaniels,

    As a change from Blagdon I can share some of the limited progress made with Westbrook. This was a very small station on the Golden Valley Railway that ran between Pontrilas and Hay. I had already constructed a baseboard and laid the track but since then that baseboard has sat under Blagdon. Rather than buy anything new I thought I should get the unfinished projects completed so a faltering start was made on completing Westbrook. The first job was to construct the station building which I did some time ago and I also built the platform, this time of wood rather than Plasticard as I've done in the past. I also completed all the station "furniture," aided by a few photos of the prototype although, annoyingly, some corners of of the station have escaped the few photographs taken at this remote location.
     
    Having completed the platform I wanted to see how it looked on the baseboard so withdrew this from under Blagdon (a task that requires our back door to be open). I've taken a photo as below but please ignore the backdrop of cleaning materials and paint brushes.
     

     
    Photos of course show up any flaws and I have corrected the leaning milk churn. The slightly wonky fishplate needs a little more work. Although out of focus you might notice the wooden lean to attached to the side of the station building.  The fencing was Microstrip and is a good match for the original. The other point worth noting is the nameboard. I used the posts from a commercial item but the nameboard itself was constructed from Plasicard. The broad surround might look odd but follows the prototype. The Slaters letters (not quite in line!) do not match GWR running in board lettering. I recollect etched brass letters closer to the font used were available at one time but not it seems now.
     
    I'm quite pleased with the trackwork which illustrates a feature rarely modelled, flat bottom track in sidings. On many branch lines chaired bullhead rail replaced the original flat bottom rail secured to the sleepers with spikes but this was usually done on the running lines only. Sidings, which had far less use, were more often than not left as they were. Oddly Blagdon retained flat bottom track to the end but with stone ballast. The Golden Valley line was upgraded to chaired bullhead but with inferior ash ballast.
     
    The gardens were a feature of Westbrook, as indeed they were at Blagdon, and both seemed to have been made in the same way. The beds were edged with large stones, the ones on Westbrook came from sieved sharp sand (also called Thames grit) which has small stones within the sand. Whislt doing this I came across a tiny shell fossil which of course found a place in the flower bed. The layout of seats and lamp posts is taken from photographs although it seems that sometimes the seat migrated to the front of the building.
     
    The platform was edged with the familiar blue bricks with a diamond pattern set upright. I used a diamond pattern Plasticard for the top and ridged for the edge. The latter does not look completely correct but captures the look that would be hard to reproduce otherwise (the only way would be to cut each brick individually and I'm not doing that!).
     
    The scenery will be poystyrene blocks glued to the wooden frame of the baseboard. I was partcularly keen to keep weight to a minimum so only the trackwork is on a MDF base. As Westbrook was sited on fairly open land the backscene is going to be particularly difficult. At Blagdon a long line of "GWR firs" provided a very effective visual stop.
     
    Once I've got a little more done I'll keep readers updated but in the meantime having acquired a second-hand copy of the comprehensive HMRS publication "All about Iron Minks" it will give me the opportunity to take a closer loook at my minks and see if any further detailing is required.
  3. JDaniels

    Confessions

    By JDaniels,

    Firstly, I have to apologise for the absence of any blog entries. Life as they say overtakes you sometimes and I've had a number of issues to sort out, most notably an aging mother and, more recently, mother-in-law having to go into care homes. We now have yet another house to empty at a time when I should be at my modelling desk. Still had two good walks this year, another part of the SW Coast Path and almost all the Cotswold Way (weather interrupted).
     
    I did notice in my prolonged absence a number of interesting blogs, I would love to have contributed my two pennyworth but it's a bit late now.
     
    Now to my main confession, readers of my blog may have noticed a photo of a GWR U4 compo in lake livery painted by Geoff Haynes. This though was actually only one coach of the three coach set that worked the Blagdon branch. I have sets in both the elaborate and simplified chocolate and cream liveries but as my preferred modelling period is the early 1920's it was essential that I had a set in the lake colour in use at that time. I wanted this set to be more realistic than the others so used the highly detailed Mainly Trains chassis and for the brakes the Shire Scenes sides. The Ratio sides are fine for a T47 brake third but it was the T36 example that was used on the Blagdon branch (and many others). This has three rather than two compartments. If you think about it a train with four third class, two first and two second compartments is hardly representative.
     
    Geoff understandably painted the sides prior to fitting the glazing and the grab and door handles. All I had to do was fit these when they came back in their immaculate lake livery. I did have misgivings on this score, justified as it turned out.
     
    The composite was fairly straightforward which is why it appears in a past blog. The plastic sides, flush on the inside, meant I only had to cut one length of glazing for each side and this could be secured with liquid poly. The holes for the door and grab rails had already been drilled and these were easily fitted. I used etched handles, the grab rails are not really that realistic as the etching process results in a flat section rather than circular but the prospect of bending brass wire into the correct shape and uniform for every handle was to my mind impossible.
     
    On to the brake thirds which of course had Shire Scenes etched brass sides. As I think I mentioned earlier, the droplights are a separate etching fixed to the inside of the coach so the glazing has to be sectioned, one piece for each pair of adjoining windows, another for each droplight. Stupidly, I thought I'd use cyano to fix the glazing and guess what, I got it on the paintwork. Even more stupidly, if that's possible, I used cyano to fix the door handles and grab rails. Yet more adhesive on the paintwork. If someone was cruel they might think it funny looking at me running around like a headless chicken trying to wash the cyano off. Of course it damaged the expensive paintwork so feeling rather chastened I quietly packed the two bodies and the separate chassis in an ice cream tub thinking maybe one day I'd have another look at them. I did seriously think why am I pursuing this hobby.
     
    They languished in that ice cream tub for some time until recently when I decided to have another look at them. At Expo EM I bought a tin of Precision Paints GWR lake which, as luck would have it, was the paint that Geoff used as it was an exact match. I had another look at the glazing, some of which had come adrift whilst some others were cloudy where the cyano had got on them. I replaced the missing and the worst of the cloudy glazing with new but this time using Araldite which doesn't go everywhere. Turning attention to the handles, I used the Comet etch which is a little wider than some of the other handles on the coach (I was reluctant to take them all off and start again) but has the advantage that it keeps the correct shape. I'm not sure where some of the etched grab handles came from so  they are a bit of mix and match but you'd have to look very closely to notice this. Maybe one day I'll replace the ones that don't match.
     
    Mating the bodies to the chassis for the first time I was encouraged that the sides didn't look as bad as I first thought. The grab rails effectively hid the cyano on the paintwork and applying thinnned down paint to the damaged areas did quite an effective job. At last I'm now able to show the three coach set for the first time, the photo shows it standing at Blagdon's platform
     

     
    The two brake thirds are numbered 951 and 952, the ones used at Blagdon from 1902 to cessation of the passenger service in 1931. Whilst close examination will reveal the flaws, at normal viewing distance these aren't visible (neither is the detailed chassis!).
     
    This wasn't the only disappointment I had. I've been experimenting with track construction using ply sleepers and rivets to represent flat bottom rail spiked directly to the sleepers. This has not worked as for some reason the spacing of the rivet holes in the ply is not that for EM gauge. Also it's difficult to get the holes in the correct position on pointwork, the exact position of the rails using the various gauges does not conform with the position of the holes drilled using the template. If I was using chaired track I'd certainly use the EMGS points and trackwork (incidentally the reason EMGS membership has increased dramatically) but for flat bottom spiked track it's back to copper clad again. This is much easier to use and by scraping an old piece of hacksaw blade over the copper sleepers I've been able tomake a representation of the grain. So far this has gone reasonably well but until the EMGS stock again the wider point sleepers work has come to a halt. One encouraging point (no pun intended) is that by taking great care over the crossing V's stock runs very smoothly through the pointwork. I replaced the wooden sleepers one by one, unsoldering and then offering up the copper one so I didn't have to dismantle the point. The intention is that the track will be the basis of a new Blagdon over two boards to accomodate any downsizing.
     
    Like the Siphon C, it's been good to finish the unfinished. The last unfinished kit I have is the GWR 2021 0-6-0ST, now reintroduced by SE Finecast. At Expo EM I brought the chassis so that might be the next thing on the agenda.
     
     
     
     
     
  4. JDaniels
    I've now been able to add the gas pipes to the roof to complete the model. Those who have read my blog will know that I'm quite obsessive about roof detail. It always surprises me that people spend so much time detailing the underframe which is hardly seen whilst ignoring the roof which is always visible. We don't look at models like you look at the prototype.
     
    Having said that I'm not sure of the exact layout of the piping. I recollect a photo of what may be a Siphon C on the Highworth branch taken from above but can I find it? As the model represents the later 1920's period, I've added the thinner acetylene pipes. For bedtime reading I've been re-discovering my old BRJ magazines and an article in one of them about gas lighting showed that remarkably few Siphons actually had any form of lighting. The Siphon C certainly did though.
     
    The plastic rod came from a model shop discovered whilst visiting my mother in a home in Axminster, Devon. Buffers is in the middle of fields but is an excellent shop with a far wider range of goods than I expected. I'm sure those in the area already know of it but if you are in the vicinity it's worth looking in.
     
    Back to the Siphon. as so often with me, things go well until I pick up a paintbrush. I wanted to do some weathering using Humbrol washes but, stupidly, picked up the dark brown which for me dries to a high gloss finish. I consequently had to use "dust"wash to cover the gloss finish which means the model is rather dirtier than I wanted. Photographic evidence shows that like all wagons they were not cleaned and therefore the level of dirt is typical. I like the dust colour as I know when washing the car the "dirt" is light but whether that holds good for a steam railway is questionable. I do like the way that weathering picks out the fine detail. Incidentally, when it comes to weathering in the aforementioned BRJ there was an advert for a book by John Hayes, "The 4mm Coal Wagon." Look at the photos and weep.
     
     

     
    The Siphon C was one part completed project that I wanted to finish. Another was a kit for a GWR 64xx pannier tank. Those of you of a certain vintage may remember a range of kits by a manufacturer, Stephen Poole. The 64Xxx was one of those and had, as all kits did in those days, a crude brass chassis. I rebuilt this to EM gauge using Romford wheels but it still looked crude. I probably wouldn't have bothered with it but it had been painted by Larry Goddard (brass safety valve cover?) so I thought it deserved a little attention.
     
    Below is a photo taken in 2015 before I tried improving it.
     

     
    I wanted a better chassis but the only one I could trace was the one from the Westward Models (I think) kit. This unfortunately was etched in one piece as an inverted "U" for OO gauge of course. In a fit of enthusiasm I split the chassis down the middle and using  brass spacers set the sides wider for EM gauge. There was no provision for compensation so it was fixed bearings aligned using lengths of 1/8th inch OD brass tube. I didn't want to spend much (any?) money on this so raided my spares drawers for a Mashima motor, Comet 38:1 gears and a motor mount of indeterminate origin. I had a number of Alan Gibson wheel sets and this was where the problem arose. The wheels I found were a tightish fit on the axles but not tight enough. Trying to quarter the wheels I found they slipped on the axles and even cyano would not cure the problem. If I wanted to make a proper job of this I would get a High Level gearbox and a new set of wheels. The moral of this story is if ever using wheels that are a push fit on the axle don't expect them to be a tight fit if taken on and off more than a couple of times. I had some old Romford wheels of the right size but the oversized flange and fixed balance weights were too much even for me. Incidentally these defects have been cured in the "Romford" wheels marketed by Markits.
     
    As any layout I do is likely to be in the "uncoloured" category the 64xx won't find any use which is why I'm reluctant to spend too much cash on it. A Bachmann body too would would be better detailed. As ever though this is the modellers quandry, what to do with those efforts from earlier days when the products; look at those handrail knobs; and your personal skill level were of a lower standard than now. I think though it is worth updating, maybe a job for the next modelling season.
     
    The other kit I mentioned in a previous blog was a GWR 2021 kit. This is being re-introduced by SE Finecast (the same range as the 517) so will wait for that to appear as it seems they are doing the chassis separately.
     
     
     
     
     
     
  5. JDaniels

    Siphon C

    By JDaniels,

    This winter has been fairly aimless as far as modelling is concerned. I thought though it might be good to try and finish one old project, the conversion of a K's Siphon F to a Siphon C. (By cutting and shutting.)  This has been attempted before and I referred to an old Model Railway Constructor for information. This advocated putting the body on a Ratio 4 wheel coach underframe but as I already had the Mainly Trains running gear kit as well as the Dean Churhward brake fret I thought constructing the chassis might make a better model. It also helped that the Russell book, Great Western Coaches, has several good photos.
     
    It's not been an easy task as to enable the body to sit at the correct height (and the top of the springs to sit on the solebar) meant having to cut out part of the Plasticard floor as the W irons protrude into the body. Using the Mainly Trains fret though meant I could use the correct springs, the ones on the Ratio underframe, being designed for a coach, are too long and it does show.
     
    The brake detail was taken from the fret. I'm not too concerned whether the layout of the gear is strictly accurate, I believe just having the rodding there and visible from normal viewing angles (no model is designed to be looked at from underneath) is sufficient. The truss rods were brass as was the stepboard, at least that won't break as inevitably happens with the Ratio plastic version. The body didn't require too much work. I added brass handrails, door handles and lamp irons. I also drilled the holes to enable access to the outside door handles if someone was locked inside. Why though did every door have to have a hole, surely one each side would suffice. The roof was an appalling fit, with the Araldite already applied I realised that it wasn't going to fit so frantically looked in my box of spares and found a plastic roof that fitted almost perfectly. No idea where it came from but even the rainstrips were curved for exactly the length of the body. In the photo below I haven't painted the roof as I want to find out how the gas pipes were laid out. It seems clear that there were two gas lamps and there must have been the associated piping. For bedside reading I'm going through my old British Railway Journals, interesting and somewhere there may be a helpful photo.
     
     

     
    What is painfully obvious is the problems I had with the lettering. As usual I resorted to my years old Pressfix sheets but fear I might end up scraping most of it off. Any film will disappear under a coat of varnish, it's actually not as prominent as in the photo, but I see no answer to the size of the "GW" branding. It's known that the standard size was originally 25 inch and then 16 inch but what isn't so well known is that the size would be further reduced if there wasn't the space. On photographs the lettering fits neatly in the appropriate space so it must have been hand painted to fit. I reckon it's 12 inches high, and is that available? Of course not. I may even advance it earlier in time so I can safely use the 25 inch letters which were on the louvres along with a ridiculously large number, which is on the Pressfix sheet. That may however compromise the either side brake handles which I've fitted.
     
    Incidentally the wagon is sitting on the trackwork I made last year. The wooden sleepers need further painting but actually look quite good. What is not so good is the gap between the bottom of the rail and the sleeper, inevitable as the rail is soldered to a protruding rivet.
     
    Finally, I understand there is an article in Model Railway Journal detailing a similar conversion. I gave up on that magazine at issue 60 as I felt, no I know, it was way beyond my capabilities and I was quite uncomfortable with  the sniping and backbiting in the letters page which has to be seen to be believed.
     
    Not sure what I'll do next. I have a Stephen Poole 64xx 0-6-0PT body painted by Larry Goddard along with a modified Cotswold chassis. That requires a decent gearbox to get going although the body is not as detailed as the Bachman offering.  There's also the M&L 2021 0-6-0ST which has sat partially completed for years. However as we're looking to downsize in a few years time I'm not sure whether it's worth doing too much as there won't be space for Blagdon Mark II. The points for which are shown in the photo. Decisions, decisions.
     
  6. JDaniels
    There's nothing like a photo to embarrass and that's hom I felt about the photo of the Siphon C in the last entry. It hadn't looked too bad until I applied the Pressfix transfers.
     
    It's a good idea to use 3mm transfers, the 16inch GWR would then become 12 inches. as Mikkel pointed out, thye size is given in the Fox Transfers website and I think it was 5.3mm which equates to 16inches in 4mm.
     
    I had another look at the Pressfix sheet and noticed that for wagons, i.e. in white, there is a size that would be suitable. I've applied those and overpainted them in yellow. The overpainting worked well on the "W" with all straight lines, less so on the "G" but still acceptable. All Siphons never seemed to be cleaned and consequently became quite mucky so any yellow off the character will be masked. I also took the opportunity to address the wayward "10 Tons," just why do errors that you never notice looking at the model become immediately apparent in a photo?
     
    A photo of the revised model below:
     
     

     
    Dammit, the original large "G" still shows through the paint! Maybe that's realism as that wasn't unknown!
     
    Like many others, I like the Siphons but I'm not sure how relevant they are on branch lines post WWI. The railways lost a great deal of milk traffic after that war as large number of surplus Army lorries became available and were promptly snapped up by budding haulage contractors. The ability to pick up milk direct from a farm and deliver to a dairy or railhead meant that that traffic was the first the railways lost. Blagdon was supposed to have a fair amount of milk traffic but a photo exists showing it being manhandled into the guard's compartment of the branch passenger train. I'm sure that was how milk was treated on most branches, the main reason for seeing a Siphon on a branch was, I believe, if required for other traffic, the strawberry specials on the Cheddar Valley line is one example that springs to mind.
     
    I mentioned in my earlier entry about downsizing and Mrs. D and I have agreed that having lived in our present house for almost 34 and a half years we will move in 2021 after my daughter's wedding. Thinking ahead an 8ft by 2ft layout won't be accomodated so will have to think about where I go from there. The modular system as suggested by Mikkel has it's appeal, perhaps a couple of stations on the Golden Valley Railway. Downsizing might also mean having to dispose of some of my disparate collection of stock acquired and built over many years, What use do I have, for example, for two, not one but two, detailed Airfix auto coaches and a detailed Siphon H? These would never have appeared at either Blagdon or the Golden Valley Railway.  I also have what must be 100 or so railway books, mostly concerned with the GWR as well as a number of official publications including several service timetables.
     
    As I said yesterday, lots of decisions and ones that will be painful to make.
     
     
  7. JDaniels
    I've now painted and therefore completed the station building. For the most part I used Humbrol acrylic paints and was pleased with how I got on with them. I've had problems in the past but I like the matt finish (unlike some so called matt enamels), the way in which you can mix the paints and the ease with which they dilute with water. I collected a number of greyish acrylics whilst I was at Gaugemaster at Ford but didn't realise that some are a satin finish, this is not shown on the container. As a result the first coat of paint was with one of these, my puzzlement answered by reference to the Humbrol colour chart. My conclusion is that acrylics are great for painting natural colours, for representing painted surfaces such as locos and coaches, enamels are best. I would have liked the underlying brown to show through a little more though.
     
    The results of my efforts:
     

     

     
    Photographs of the end without the extension seem to show a lighter patch of stone in the middle of the wall with darker patches either side. I had thought about trying to represent this but thought that if I did anyone looking at it would say that I got the weathering wrong!
     
    As you can see, I have added a couple of notice boards. Photos of the station show boards in the position I've fixed them although these disappeared in the "goods only" days. In part 3 of his series of books on modelling GWR branches, Stephen Williams suggested putting a raised border round the edge of the board to better represent prototype practice. The flat surface of the Tiny Signs boards are just that, flat. I didn't feel able to cut out a square in paper as he did so used the finest Microstrip instead. I also fixed the boards with two battens each, if I was presented with the job of fixing a flat board to a rough surface that's exactly what I would do.Also, as Stephen Willaims suggested, both boards were given a coat of matt varnish.
     
    I really must refer to the Stephen Williams books more,they are full of simple ideas that can make such a difference.
     
    The roof has turned out well, if a little irregular, but I didn't do too much weathering. We had Sunday lunch at a local pub yesterday, the service was slow and I found myself looking out at a house opposite with a slate roof. It had been raining and the roof looked new, pristine dark grey with no staining at all. We probably forget the cleansing properties of rain and the Welsh border country has plenty of that.
     
    I'm now looking at the edging of the platform. I recently visited an excellent little model shop in Salisbury and found a sheet of moulded Plasticard with a very small diamond pattern. This is perfect for bricks (or slabs) that formed the edge of the platform. If I had felt like it I could have scored the strip to represent the separate bricks but balked at the thought. The separate bricks are hardly noticeable and bearing in mind my complete inability to consistently measure the same distance each time I thought it would probably look worse.
     
    If anyone would like to see photos of the prototype Google "Westbrook station" and any number will come up. Take out the photos of Westbrook station in Canada, there's no mistaking them, and you're left with fewer than half a dozen and only some of these show the station building. It's a gloomy looking station overshadowed by trees but did have quite a floral display. With two trains each way a day (three on Thursday, Hay market day) Station Master Knowles had plenty of tinme to ensure the gardens were tidy.
  8. JDaniels
    I've now completed the station building apart from the painting. Unfortunately due to the weather it looks as though we won't be going down to Ford tomorrow (celebrating Mrs. D's birthday) so the light and dark stone I was going to get from Gaugemaster will have to wait.
     
    In my last entry I was about to make substantive progress with the roof. The jig I made to cut the tiles (in 5thou Plasticard) worked well apart from the odd occasion when I failed to notice the strip was firmly against the stop which resulted in a slightly narrower tile. Experience prompted me to make another jig (visible in the front of the building in the photo below). This was simply a strip of etched NS waste with a length of bullhead rail soldered to it. The distance between the edge of the waste and the edge of the rail is important as this will be the height of the tile visible. I made sure the first, bottom, row was in line and thereafter the other rows were laid by aligning the edge of the rail to the bottom edge of the tiles already laid. The next row was then laid with the bottom of each tile abutting the top of the etch. This ensured the row spacing was consistent and that they were all in line. As a check I ruled a few parallel lines on the underlying Plasticard base to ensure that as I went up towards the apex of the roof the rows were not sloping one way or the other which would have been disastrous for the appearance. Fortunately the template ensured this did not happen.
     
    In total I think I laid about 600 tiles but with a ready supply of pre-cut tiles and the jig in place I found I could lay a row of 21/22 tiles in 2 minutes or less. I just put some liquid poly on the base sheet and picked up the tiles with the point of a craft knife, in fact it was putting the cement on that was the biggest hindrance to quick progress. As the underlying tiles showed above the jig it was easy to locate the tiles midway over the underlying joint and against the strip of NS etch. I can say that without these jigs I would not have been able to do the roof, I find difficulty in measuring millimetres from a ruler and even the smallest variance in the size of the tiles would have been immediately noticeable.
     
    I thought the ridge tiles would be slate but photographs show conventional rounded clay tiles. This caused a little head scratching but I found a length of thick walled plastic tube of about the right diameter in my "plastics" box. (I also have a "metals" box.) I filed a flat along the length of the tube, actually exposing the hollow core. The core was further filed out which then enabled the length of tube to be fitted over the apex of the roof.
     
    I have only traced 4 photos of the building, 3 of those are taken from a roughly three-quarter angle looking towards the plain end wall and only one is taken, again at a roughly three-quarter angle, of the wall with the extension. This one was taken after closure. I have no photo looking directly at the front (or indeed back) wall. The plan did not show the extension or detail of guttering and downpipes although it appears from the photos that there was guttering along the front and back, as indeed one would expect. I still had a few lengths of fine plastic angle which, if the external right angle is sanded down, makes very acceptable guttering. I must try and get more of this as the back gutter is made up of 4 strips as I didn't have one length long enough. The downpipes were plastic rod which fortunately takes a little bending. There was no sign of the downpipes on the front face of the building so I had to assume they angled in and were fixed to the end wall. Such is the joy of modelling a prototype location but I don't think anyone alive can tell me that's wrong!
     
    One final complication was the chimney. The photo I used for reference showed the chimney lost in a haze but it was only after I looked at another photo did I realise the structure was a good deal higher than I had made it. It was also more elaborate at the top so I spent some time adding further layers. It is interesting to see how ornate chimneys could be when compared with the rest of a building.
     

     
    A couple of other minor points. The door handles are brass handrail knobs and the gap between the extension roof and the wall of the main building was covered by a strip of 5thou Plasticard to represent the lead flashing. I was quite pleased to see on a better photograph of Clifford station (the other on the Hay extension and with a similar, though larger building) that the lead flashing was prominent; I previously guessed it must have been there without any evidence. For those who don't know the Golden Valley Railway, it is worth mentioning that the branch originally ran from Pontrilas to Dorstone. The stations all had wooden buildings. Soon after opening the line was extended to Hay on Wye with three new stations, Clifford, Westbrook and Green's Siding. The latter was always just a halt but for some reason the other two stations were favoured with a substantial stone structure for the main building even though they contributed less traffic than Dorstone for example.
     
    I can perhaps now make a start on painting the stonework. I found by Googling a colour photograph of an existing bridge on the Hay extension which was useful in determining the colour of stone used. It is clearly made from the same stone as Westbrook station building as the blocks appear identical, and indeed very similar to those on the embossed sheet I used. The bridge is a light brown with what I thought was a slight grey tinge, again similar to that used for the embossed sheet. This type of research is one of the interesting parts of modelling a prototype location and it's always a good feeling to fill one of the holes in your knowledge of the prototype.
     
    This has been an interesting exercise and it's nice to be able to construct something from scratch rather than a kit. Now I have to think about what I do next.
  9. JDaniels

    GWR 0-4-2T's

    By JDaniels,

    As I write this it's pouring with rain outside so a return to modelling or rather the blog. I tend to vacate the modelling bench in the summer for other pleasures, this year a cruise round the Baltic and more recently walking the Cleveland Way. You just know it's time to get away from the television when Channel 5 do a programme "The Great Model Railway Challenge" and no I didn't watch it. As a result of these other activities I haven't even looked at RM Web for several months.
     
    Those who have read my blog will know that I was constructing the Wills 517 0-4-2T. I was able to hand this over to Geoff Haynes at Expo EM for painting and it was returned a few weeks ago. Rather than just focus on this one model I thought it might be more interesting to have a look at the five 0-4-2T locos I have which emanate from four different manufacturers and were built over a period of 40 years.
     
    Let's take the latest, the Wills 517 kit first:
     

     
    I'm pleased with the result but I always think a professional paint job makes a difference. This was the first loco I constructed with CSB suspension and I think in a previous blog I mentioned that I did not notice much difference in the running over a compensated chassis. Having run it in I now think that it is better than most compensated chassis and is worth the extra effort. In one respect it is far superior and that is noise level. My other locos, when running on Blagdon, are quite noisy but are quiet in the fiddle yard. This one is very quiet even on the ballasted track. The reason for this is obvious, when ballasting Blagdon I used diluted PVA which sets like cement. Under that ballast is foam underlay but it may as well not be there for all the good it does. In future I will use Copydex as suggested elsewhere in other blogs.
     
    I think the running must be quieter as all axles are separately sprung and therefore insulated, if that is the right word, from the chassis. I also used Alan Gibson sprung plunger pick-ups and they seem to have curbed any tendency to hesitate when running. The model has Ultrascale wheels, a Mashima motor and High Level 60-1 gears, the whole assembly contained within the side tanks so nothing intrudes into the cab or under the boiler. It certainly runs as well as any Portecap fitted loco.
     
    The Wills kit represents a 517 in later life, fortunately I had good photos of both sides of 848 which was auto fitted. This meant a fair amount of additional detailing was necessary in particular the cylinder in front of the right side cab sheets which may be something to do with the auto gear. This is no criticism of the kit, every 517 seemed to be different so this is not a kit that can just be assembled without reference to any photos.
     
    The other 517 is quite different as it represents a survivor that was little changed in its' later years. Number 559 always had the straight backed bunker, open cab, most unusually a round top boiler, inside frames to the trailing wheels but, conversely, acquired the modern innovation of top feed.
     

     
    This loco's stumpy and severe appearance makes it a particular favourite of mine although, looking at its' condition in the two photos I have found of the original, clearly not with the crews as it looks quite unkempt. This was, I think, an M&L kit which I thought was well detailed, went together perfectly and had a number of useful alternative parts. It is fitted with a Portescap RG1219 motor and runs superbly. Looking at photos of 559 and 848 you would think they were from a different class.
     
    Leaving now the 517's, we turn to their replacement the 48xx/58xx 0-4-2T. I have three of these but without doubt the best one is 5807 in as built condition:
     

     
    This is an etched kit from Rod Neep marketed by a model shop in York (long since closed). To my mind this demonstrates the superior appearance of sheet metal over cast white metal (or plastic for that matter); after all it's what the protoypes were made from. I've studied many photos of the prototypes and to my mind this captures the appearance of this very popular class well.This one is another favourite.The model has a Portecap RG1624 and runs superbly. I possibly could have shoehorned the larger Portescap into 559. In those days too Portescap motors were just a bit expensive, not stupidly so.
     
    Whilst I was able to construct this etched kit, I did have a lot of problems with the Mallard 517 to the extent that I gave up. This had overlays which I could not get on with so whilst I appreciate the improved appearance of an etched kit I am reluctant to go down that route again hence the pain free Wills version.
     
    The last two 48xx were both constructed from K's kits. Those younger than me (very much younger!) may not be aware that this was the first cast white metal kit introduced, I think in about 1957. You can certainly criticise the chassis and the motors of these kits but to my mind the body, with a little work, doesn't look too bad. After the flash and casting imperfections, the biggest issue is with the smokebox door which is easily replaced. Oddly the Airfix 48xx had exactly the same issue. In those days the chassis was two strips of 1/16th inch (?) brass strip with 1/8th inch holes for the axles. The K's motors were abominations, even the earlier metal ones were Araldited together and as for the plastic ones.....
     

     
    I guess I must have built this kit in the mid 1970's. It now has the identity 4836 and is in as built condition. It was painted by Larry Goddard (as was 559 and 5807) and has had quite a few chassis since then. It now has what I think may be a compensated Comet chassis with High Level Gears and a Mashima motor. Once I realised the issue with the smokebox I managed to replace it and match Larry Goddards' finish. Yes you can criticise it in several respects but it is a part of my modelling history. You cannot keep throwing the last kit you made away because the latest one is better. I've tried to look after it but after 40 years or so wear and tear is apparent on the paintwork. I view it not as an accurate model but as part of my past that, within the constraints of keeping the paintwork has evolved.
     
    The last of this collection is another K's kit representing the class in BR days when one worked the daily freight to Blagdon. This loco, 1463, was shedded at Bristol St. Phillips Marsh so probably did work to Blagdon.
     

     
    I was given the model by a friend so after applying paint stripper I did a little detailing once again replacing that awful smokebox door. As an auto fitted version the gubbins on the buffer beams and associated piping were added and this time I kept the steps on the fireman's side of the bunker. Unfortunately I did not do a good job of removing them on 4836 (on the prototype the steps were added later) and you can still see where they were. One other change that was made later was the addition of the whistle shield. Otherwise few changes were made to the class over their life, perhaps the other most noticeable feature was top feed which was added to some of them (but not 1463). This more uniform appearance makes them easier to model than the 517's.
     
    I painted 1463 using car matt black spray and of course got what I think is called an orange peel finish. Again it has an etched compensated chassis with Mashima motor and High Level gearbox.
     
    It's interesting to compare the different kits and see what progress has been made over the years. It's also interesting to reflect on my journey through this hobby over 40 plus years, I'm fairly sure the K's 48xx (4836) was the first kit I made so even if a little ropey, it still means something to me.
  10. JDaniels
    Underneath my Blagdon layout is another smaller baseboard with a representation of Westbrook station on the Golden Valley Railway. This prosaically named branch has always appealed to me and some years ago I laid the track and started the scenery for a model of Westbrook. Wanting a change from constructing locos and coaches I had a go at resurrecting this. I firstly stripped all the scenery off and cut the baseboard so that it follows the line of the track only. My intention was to mount this on a frame with the infill (the scenery) made from expanded polystyrene. My aim has been to reduce the weight without sacrificing the rigidty required for the track which still has a MDF base.
     
    I was dismayed to discover that the track had buckled in places so had to repair this. The running line through Westbrook was chaired track but the siding still retained the original flat bottom track. This is something very characteristic of many stations. I also rewired the track and fitted the socket for the controllers that I now use.
     
    The track was I think SMP EM gauge flexitrack with the point on the running line made from their components which use separate chairs. The siding was constructed from flat bottom track soldered to PCB sleepers. I repainted the track and generally improved its' appearance as best I could.
     
    I made a far more substantial platform from ply rather than the Plastikard I used initially. Having done this it was time to look at the station building, an attractive stone structure. Fortunately the book on the branch written by W H Smith includes a plan of the building. This, incidentally, is a very interesting book as the principal driver on the line kept a diary and was quite a keen photographer. The day to day operations of branch lines are rarely recorded but the book quotes extensively from the diary giving a real sense of how this long forgotten outpost of the GWR was run.
     
    The station building was constructed from Plastikard with the embossed stone facing. This seemed to match very closely the size and layout of stones used on the actual building. An additional complication was the quoins at the corner which, according to the plan, were of different sizes. The quoins on my model are also of different sizes but that was not the intention. The note on the plan was my get out clause! The walls of the building are several layers of Plastikard as the original building I made many years ago warped badly. The windows and doors were constructed as sub-assemblies fixed to the inside of the walls when completed.
     
    The big problem I could see was the roof. I consulted the Stephen Williams book on GWR Branch Line modelling and for slate roofs he suggested using thin writing paper cut to the size of each slate (the book helpfully gives the sizes of the slates most commonly used). I couldn't get on with using paper so substituted very thin Plastikard which of course fixes better. Cutting the slates is far harder that it seems as whatever size of slate is used, every slate has to be the same size. As, with all tiling, the slate / tiles overlap the join of those underneath and if the width is even fractionally out that overlap will be lost. Knowing that I was going to have to cut several hundred tiles (this is supposed to be an enjoyable hobby?) and realising that my older eyes weren't up to the job I fashioned a simple jig using a redundant frame spacer and two pieces of scrap etch. The frame spacer is bent up, the upturned sction will be the surface against which the strip of Plastikard is pushed against. A piece of the scrap is soldered to the base of the frame spacer against the upturned edge and at right angles to it; the edge of the Plastikard strip bears against this. To this piece is soldered, at right angles, a further strip of scratch etch parallel to the upturned surface of the frame spacer. This last piece of metal is the edge against which the strip is cut. The Plasikard strip goes under this last piece of metal and bears against both the upturned edge of the frame spacer and the scrap etch at right angles to it. All I have to do is cut along the last piece of metal, flick the cut piece out of the way and push the strip along ready for the next cut. So far it's worked really well. The height of the slates (the width of the strip) is less important as any discrepancies are hidden under the overlapping slates. I've described this in some detail as I think others may find it useful. Moulded sheets do not capture the appearance of slates at all.
     

     
    The photo of the station building also shows the jig I used for the slates. I haven't yet painted the walls and found that my tin of GWR Light Stone had gone off. The Dark Stone was a little better and as there isn't much woodwork to be painted I persevered with this; the Light Stone to be added once I get a nfresh tin of it. There is a lot of comment about the exact shade used but it's worth remembering that the colours were made by mixing burnt sienna pigment into white lead paint on the job. A colour card was provided (the HMRS guide includes a colour chart matched to Swindon records) but you can imagine how the foreman's sensitivity to colour, the lighting at the time and the dirt on the card can all affect the final shade. As the HMRS guide points out, there were doubtless times when the card was lost altogether.
     
    I'll update readers of further progress with the layout. I have also been working on trackwork building four turnouts for a potentially better model of Blagdon. These use wooden sleepers with rivets and Code 75FB rail Whilst the sleepers look realistic I'm not convinced that it's a quantum leap in overall appearance over PCB. I've also ignored some of the accepted practices of turnout construction and encountered a few problems arising from the use of FB rather than bullhead track. What I can say is that initial running tests show rolling stock passes very smoothly over the completed turnouts. If there is interest I can describe how I constructed these turnouts.
  11. JDaniels
    Firstly apologies as I haven't looked at the blogs for a while. After the late snow the weather here has been great and the modelling has taken a back seat. My son and I walked the Limestone Way in May and I've been organising our next walk, the Cleveland Way in September.
     
    I went to Expo EM mainly to hand over the SEF 517 to Geoff James for painting. There were a number of layouts there but one that did impress was Tim Venton's Clutton. There is a trend today for layouts the area of a Corn Flakes box but here was one, 24ft x7ft, built to the same high standards as these much smaller ones; clearly requiring a great deal more time to construct. I particularly liked the fact that it was based on a prototype location so there is little opportunity to use commercially available items. What was also good to see was that features in the landscape (I recall a particular farm) were identified by notices around the baseboard edge. I can only marvel at the dedication required, the trackwork, for example, comprised individual chairs glued to plywood sleepers. I think that would have driven me insane!
     
    I also wanted to see David Geen's stand as I was hoping to purchases a couple of his wagon kits but regrettably he wasn't able to attend. It is interesting to see the trade stands though and see what is available. It's also useful to check up on the trader's websites. I hesitate to mention this as I was taken to task the last time I strayed into this field but I notice that Wizard Models, one of the traders at Expo EM, have a selection of Mainly Trains parts available. I don't know whether they have taken over and are now manufacturing them or whether this is old stock but bearing in mind that MT sold a wonderful selection of parts that no one else does I thought others might be interested. I see for example that the Cambrian 2-4-0T chassis is available, I have a vague thought about getting another to compensate it as the fixed chassis doesn't perform spectacularly well.
     
    One of the effects of visiting a show with high quality layouts and rolling stock on display is that it prompts you to have another look at your own stock to se if that passes muster. Mostly I thought it did (I was able to correct some glossy weathering on some of my 1902 wagons - solution - stir the paint THOROUGHLY!).
     
    One obvious candidate for refurbishment was a GWR T49 brake third. Last year I had a spare Ratio chassis and wanting something different purchased the sides from Shire Scenes last year. Unfortunately my painting looked as though it had been applied with a tar brush and, having Araldited the body to the chassis, one of the brake door windows fell off and rattled about inside. I manged to prise the body off the chassis, applied paint stripper to the sides and had another go at glazing, this time using Araldite rather than Superglue. This time I opted for chocolate and cream rather than all over chocolate and although still not perfect, the finish was better. The metal sides mean the surface needs priming which, for me, makes it harder to obtain a decnt finish. Glazing Shire Scenes sides is an absolute pig as the door droplights and hinges are seperate etchings that fit on the inside which therefore means that each pair of windows and every droplight has to be glazed separately. I still managed to get some Araldite on the glazing but as it is dark inside this shows up only as a dirty window (surely that happened even on the GWR!). Using chocolate and cream meant I had to apply the lining between the two which, I read, is not gold and black (that was only used on prestige stock) but a single yellow line. Fox transfers supply a suitable decal.
     
    Lettering is a bone of contention. I have tried using Pressfix but just cannot get on with the smaller transfers. Every time I tried to apply the class designation to the doors, the individual letters floated away when I wet the tissue paper. They work for the larger items such as the coat of arms but for class designations and numbers; hopeless. I've varnished the sides and will apply the class designation and numbers once I can find transfers that do work, unfortunately Fox Transfers only do the later post war style.
     
    I detailed the chassis with brake gear (Mainly Trains did a very useful etch) and the photo shows the result.
     

     
    Not brilliant but it's an interesting change from the usual GWR 4 wheeled brake.
     
    To show what a difference a decent paint job (by Geoff James) can make, attached is a photo of Ratio composite sides on a Mainly Trains chassis. I have to say I like the lake livery which to my mind looks very dignified.
     

     
    Finally, those who read my blog may recall how taken I was with the Dapol 'O' gauge range, in particular the Stroudley Terrier. As a GWR fan though it wasn't too difficult to put this aside, the only GWR loco they did was a quite expensve 64xx 0-6-0PT. However the range is being extended with that old favourite, the GWR 48xx/14xx/58xx 0-4-2T at the same price as the Terrier. No photos at the moment but it's bound to be excellent and also tempt a lot of people, including myself to the senior scale.
     
    i hope all RM Web users have a great summer, I'm putting the modelling away for now. See you all in the Autumn.
  12. JDaniels
    I noticed that whilst I included a photo of the chassis in my previous entry, there wasn't one of the almost completed loco. Now rectified. It will look a lot better once decked out in GWR unlined green.
     
    I also noticed that in my previous entry I referred to the motor as being a 1620. I should have said 1420.
     
    One small point I forgot to mention which illustrates well the frustration with modelling this particular class. There are two spare lamp brackets on the left hand side of the footplate. I had the copy of GWRJ 75 at my desk and looked at several photos showing the left hand side and in every case the brackets were equidistant from the centre of the splasher. The photo of 848 though showed the right hand side. Having fitted the spare lamp brackets I looked again at the photo on the internet showing the left hand side (taken from a RMWeb post) and the rear lamp bracket was much farther back than in all the other examples, the forward one was in the same position. A small point and one easily corrected but it shows how difficult it is to model this class.
     
    One other point that I took from the photo is the footplate piping, yes it does curve down towards the rear on the prototype. I'm also intrigued as to what the prominent cylinder is on the tank top in front of the cab spectacle plate. I can only assume it is something to do with the auto apparatus.
     
    In my previous entry I noted that with this kit I used Alan Gibson plunger pickups. I would certainly use them again as they impose no more drag on the wheels than conventional wire pickups, are probably more reliable and, provided you paint the part of the bush peeping out behind the wheel (which I haven't done) unobtrusive. It is though early days.
     
    As to CSB, yes if the kit provided for it then I would use it again. An unexpected bonus with using it on an 0-4-2T is that the drive can be on the rear coupled axle and the motor and gearbox accomodated within the tank assembly. If using compensation then the rear coupled axle is compensated with the pony truck and the drive has to be on the front coupled axle with potentially gearbox or motor showing under the boiler. CSB certainly works well on this loco, it runs very well although I had to add some lead to allow the spring steel wire to deflect sufficiently. However a compensated chassis with a High Level 60:1 gearbox will also run well.
     
    This just about finishes my modelling this season, the garden and long distance walks beckon. I had hoped to be able to experiment with wooden sleeper trackwork and some ideas I have for point construction but it looks as though that will have to wait till the autumn. Trouble is I just like fiddling around with loco kits!
  13. JDaniels
    Well I've just about completed the kit and I'm reasonably pleased despite the shortcomings outlined in my earlier entry.
     
    I tried two new features (for me) on the chassis, CSB suspension and Alan Gibson plunger pickups. The CSB suspension does make life a little more complicated as all hornblocks have to move up and down (not sideways!) and unlike a compensated chassis, the suspension only works when weight, i.e. the body, is applied. I used spring steel wire but even here care is required as the gauge has to be such that it allows deflection, if the wire is too stiff the hornblocks will not move in the vertical plane. One advantage though is that the deflection is minimal. With a compensated chassis the hornblocks move to a far greater extent which can cause problems with the pickups which are at risk of "running off" the tyres.
     
    One point I didn't mention in my earlier entry was the method I use to obtain a working clearance in the hornblocks. I used High Level hornblocks which are already reasonably accurate but will require a little work to obtain a nice sliding fit. Rather than use a file I use fine valve grinding paste on a scrap of nickel silver rubbing the axlebox on it until I get a perfect fit in the hornblock. Of couse it is important to ensure all trace of grinding paste is cleaned away, I use an ethyl alcohol spray obtained from late lamented Maplin's. To ensure I always work on the two sides adjoining the hornblock I scratch "T" (top) on one face of the axlebox.
     
    The photo below shows the chassis after spraying with my usual Halfords Matt Black. The CSB beam, in reality the spring wire, is visible.
     

     
    The photo also shows the bush for the Alan Gibson plunger pick-ups. I had never used these before so was interested to see how they performed. It is apparent that the 2.5mm hole required can weaken the chassis if the depth is minimal. However it was difficult to see how current collectors could be arranged to bear on the leading wheels.
     
    I sprayed the wheels separately prior to fitting using Maskol to protect the treads and the back upon which the current collectors would bear. Having used the axle jigs to ensure the axleboxe centres were exactly the same as the coupling rods I expected little difficulty in getting the chassis to run freely. Not the case! I spent a long time moving the wheels imperceptibly to get the quartering correct and also enlarged the holes in the coupling rods slightly. There does need to be a little clearance between the coupling rod and the crankpin bush but too much and the chassis will never run freely. I tried the old trick of lining up the spokes but still spent the best part of two or three evenings trying to elinminate the slight binding that was occurring. One problem may have been that the Ultrascale wheels are not as tight on the axles as Gibsons. This makes them a little easier to fit but the downside is that they move too easily. Eventually when I did get the chassis running smoothly I applied a little Superglue to the axle ends to fix them permanently.
     
    Next issue was offering up the chassis to the body. For some reason the 1624 motor was now too long and protruded well into the cab. The Gods weren't smiling on me after all. I obtianed a 1620 from High Level and after some sweating trying to remove the worm from the 1624, managed to fit it to the 1620. The new High Level gearboxes are an improvement on the already excellent earlier ones but from past experience it seems the worms on the new ones are a tighter fit. The plunger pickups were assembled and following my normal practice (if possible) the rear wheel pickups were fitted on top of the chassis, thin phosphor bronze wire soldered to a piece of copper coated paxolin with a small gold plated bead in turn soldered to the end of the wire and bearing on the tread. For the first time I have a GWR tank loco where neither pickups or motor intrude where they shouldn't.
     
    The Alan Gibson plunger pickups worked very well with minimal pressure on the back of the wheels. As they are lightly sprung contact with the back of the tyres is maintained at all time although very thin wire must be used otherwise the operation of the plunger is restricted. I would certainly use them again.
     
    The photo below shows the chassis almost completed but still with the larger motor. The Ultrascale wheels look good, the small hole in the axle ends makes quite a difference.
     
     
     

     
    The outside bearings to the trailing wheel are a separate etching. I fitted these after replacing an ejector pipe I had soldered each side, I found that it fouled the wheels. You will also see that a little touching up is required.
     
    Fitting the completed chassis to the body resulted in further problems as the motor and rear pickups still fouled part of the inner casting of the tank sides even if they didn't protrude into the cab. It wasn't too difficult to remove the offending white metal but what was more of a problem was the clearance between the front driving wheels and the splashers. Whilst manufacturers helpfully provide alteranative frame spacers for EM and P4 the body clearances often become a problem, particularly with white metal kits where of necessity the material has to be thicker. Using a chunky file I managed to remove enough without going through the other side.
     
    Having done all this I tried the chassis and body combination and it worked very well. Unless you have used High Level gearboxes you have no conecption as to how quiet a locomotive will run. The plunger pickups worked impeccably and even my phosphor bronze wire ones at the rear needed no adjusting.
     
    Whilst the body had been substantially completed I decided to replace the etched lamp irons with flattened brass wire soldered not just to the surface of the white metal but I also drilled a hole to fix the wire more permanently. I always feel it is no use having a perfectly detailed model if over time parts drop off. Various scraps of metal were used to make the odd shaped cylinder in front of the right hand cab window and brass wire for the various pipes along the footplate valance. Incidentally if anyone thinks the wire on the valance on the right hand side isn't straight, it's exactly as it was on the prototype, it curved gently near the cab end. I fashioned the various auto fittings on the buffer beam and a brake cylinder to go under the rear buffer beam. These are very prominent on the prototype.
     
    I will be getting the body professionally painted as I feel a decent paint job really lifts a model and it's something way beyond me. Whilst working on the kit it did again make me consder the limitations of 4mm modelling where the smallest parts of a steam locomotive really can't be fashioned with any accuracy. If you want to see what I mean have a look at the 7mm models of 517's on the Lee Marsh models site.
     
    I'm not sure whether my blow by blow account is of interest but I try and detail the way I do things in the hope others might find it useful. If I've learnt by my mistakes so others won't make them in the first place.
  14. JDaniels
    I've just had an E-mail from Eileen's Emporium. They have now taken over the marketing of the Parkside Dundas kits from Peco.
     
    Whilst the kits are predominantly BR wagons, there are a number of GWR types there as well as the interesting SR CCT truck.
     
    I've never really thought about the Parkisde kits as they seem so hard to find but that should now change. Not sure I could justify any more wagon kits but the range on offer will appeal to many.
  15. JDaniels

    SE Finecast 517 0-4-2T

    By JDaniels,

    This has been a frustrating project. Progress has not been helped by having to clear, and eventually sell, my mother's house. She is living with my sister and modelling has taken a back seat of late.
     
    In my last entry I commented on the difficulty in trying to find a suitable prototype. Although a large class the number of individual locos that mirror the Finecast kit is very small. I eventually settled on 848, there is a photo of this loco on the internet and, fortuitously, a photo of the other side in the GWR Journal 75. It looks as though this loco was fitted with a cab in the 1920's so had a relatively long life (relatively meaning 10 or 15 years) in this form. Some locos were not rebuilt to the form specified in the kit until the 1930's. This was also an auto fitted example which I did not really want but the numberplates for this loco are included in the kit. From this one must infer that the (accurately etched) numberplates provided with the kit (which also include 216, 519, 1164, 1427 and 1473 "Fair Rosamund") represent the prototypes covered by the kit.
     
    But they don't. In my last entry I briefly mentioned the smokebox. Looking into this more closely this seems to be significant error as in later years the locos (including 848) appeared to have a drumhead type riveted smokebox. Earlier photos show a flush riveted smokebox that appears to wrap around rather than sit on top of the cylinder casting and it is this that is provided with the kit. I know we have readers with a far greater knowledge of these locos than I and I'd be interested to know the reason for the change. The RCTS history makes no mention of this but comparing the photo with the model it does show up, particularly the lack of rivets.
     
    All of this has dampened enthusiasm to get on with the kit although as you can see from the photo the major part of the body has been constructed. If someone else is about to make the kit my starting point was to file down the floor (which acts as a spacer between the two tank / cab and bunker side assemblies) until the bunker back plate is a snug fit. Do not, as I did, attempt to fix the front buffer beam until the front part of the boiler is firmly fixed to the rear boiler / tank top. The position of the boiler, once fixed, will determine the exact position of the buffer beam as it locks the two sides in place and you would not want it pointing in a different direction from the boiler.
     
    It was quite impressive how accurately the parts all fitted together. Older readers may remember K's kits which could be an absolute pig. In a very early life I worked in a model shop on Saturdays and a regular visitor was one Iain Rice. I remember him telling me that K's kits were taken out of the mould whilst still hot which caused them to distort. Wills (as SE Finecast was know then) kits were always easier to build.
     
    I always use low melting point solder wherever possible. With a low wattage soldering iron (mine is an Antex 25w which helpfully packed up midway through construction) with a very fine tip it is very difficult to melt the white metal castings although you may see from the photo I managed to do this on the inside of the cab side top. It is also important to use a good flux, I use the appropriate Carrs one (can't remember the label colour). One advantage of using solder is that it can be used as a filler. The critical gap between the two parts of the boiler (level with the front of the tanks) was filled this way and sanded down. I'm aware though that a lot more cleaning up is needed.
     
    As you can see from the photograph, I substituted a brass dome, safety valve cover, whistles and some other small items for the white metal versions. There is also a brass chimney, all these came from Alan Gibson. I always think it best to replace any delicate white metal castings such as the whistles, smokebox door dart and steam cleaning lance with something more substantial as you just know they would break off once the model has been painted. I also had a fret of window bars from Mainly Trains and I soldered these over the rear spectacle openings.
     
    The chassis is nicely etched and very well detailed with full brake gear (alternative brake blocks are provided). I think I mentioned earlier that provision is made for CSB suspension and I opted to try this. The only other alternative to this is to have the coupled wheel axles fixed and this was unacceptable. For preference I would have used compensation. Incidentally, the chassis fret also includes some body parts, the lamp and fire irons which is a nice touch. I thought the lamp irons were overscale but comparing them with photographs it is clear that they should be fairly chunky.
     
    This CSB suspension caused a few issues as the High Level hornblocks didn't work with the settings specified in the instructions. The fulcrum points are helpfully marked but if using setting "A" as specified, the beam, in reality a length of spring steel wire, is obstructed by the hormblock guides. As the instructions state that the hornblocks should sit at the top of the cut-out in the frames I could really see no solution. I eventually opted to use the top setting for the beam ("C") and drilled new fulcrum holes above the old ones. The other issue was determing the gauge of wire to be used, Chris Gibbons said this depended on the weight of the body and the steel wire I had was too stiff. Fortunately Eileens Emporium have a choice of steel wire and I found that the thicker wire I obtained from them (still thinner than the one I used originally) looks to provide the right deflection. The wire can be replaced with a different gauge if necessary. Hornblocks were set using a jig (in reality two axles turned down to accomodate the holes in the connecting rods) but I do find that with the crankpins available reaming out the hole to provide clearance means coming perilously close to the edge of the metal. The crankpins are from Ultrascale, as are the wheels.
     
    One big advantage of CSB over compensation is the ability to drive to either axle. The ideal would be to drive to the rear coupled axle (impossible with compensation) and have motor and gears within the tank assembly. For once the Gods took pity on me, and using a High Level Road Runner + Gearbox with a Mashima 1624 motor the whole assembly fitted between the front of the tanks and the boiler backplate with no more than 2mm to spare at either end. As you will see from the photograph, a great advantage of the High Level gearboxes is the ability to place the drive to the axle under the motor making the whole assembly more compact.
     
    A piece of copper coated paxolin is provided in the kit but for the life of me I cannot see where pick-ups could be fitted. Against my better instinct I think I will have to use the Alan Gibson plunger type. I don't like anything that restricts the freedom to check the quartering and free running of the chassis which is why I have an aversion to gears that have to be glued to the axle. I believe though that the later version imposes far less drag on the wheels.
     
    So this is progress to date. I'm pondering whether it would be possible to wrap thin brass round the smokebox embossed with the rivets but I think there would be problems fixing it and it could as a consequence look worse than it does at the moment. One extreme option would be to cut off the bunker and substitute it with one of the earlier versions I have in my spares box.
     
    All of the above means I'm having difficulty in mustering much enthusiasm to get on with the job. I'll do what I always do if things aren't working out; stop and think.
     
    I'll report again once further progress has been made.
  16. JDaniels

    SE Finecast 517

    By JDaniels,

    I've come to a dead halt with the construction of this kit. The chassis commendably includes three different types of brake shoes, two types of brake pull rods and three types of guard irons. All you need to do is find a good photo of your chosen prototype and work from there. It wasn't until I looked more closely at the kit and prototype photos did I realise that my chosen prototype, 540, was quite different from the kit.
     
    Firstly, as the kit is based on the Collett cab version initially that restricts you to those 67 examples so fitted. However even that apparently large number has to be pared back as many of these had the upper cab side corner of the bunker formed as a convex curve rather than the concake curve in the kit. Also, a few of those examples still retained their round top boiler. The biggest issue to my mind though is the difference between those examples with frames modified at Swindon and those modified at Wolverhampton. The Swindon conversions had straight steps and a very deep footplate valance whilst those modified at Wolverhampton had the more elegant steps with curved plating that the kit portrays along with a much narrower footplate valance. The steps in the kit can be cut back to represent the Swindon pattern and the depth of the valance in the kit more closely represents the Swindon conversion. Of the Collett cab versions, only 4 were modified at Wolverhampton.The impression I have from studying photos though is that the depth of the Swindon conversion valance can vary although always clearly deeper than the Wolverhampton conversions. I've attached a photo of the sides along with the chassis, smokebox and smokebox door. The valance to my mind is not as deep as it appears on some Swindon examples.
     
    Talk of the smokebox and smokebox door demonstrates another difference. Most of the smokeboxes on the 517's were riveted although clearly other photos show plain versions which is what the kit has. The smokebox door in the kit is of a plain, slightly concave, pattern as used for example on the 48xx 0-4-2T but many of the 517's, like 540, had a dished smokebox door with rows of rivets above the door itself.
     
    Finally, 10 of the Collett cab version had inside trailing wheel bearings. I already have one of these, 559, so particularly wanted the outside frame version which I think is more typical of the class.
     
    Most of the above came from RCTS part 6 which is a mine of information. I did find a photo of one Collett cab example not mentioned in the book though, 558.
     
    It's a case of finding a prototype that matches the kit, I'm spending more time looking through my books than modelling! It also needs to be a photo that shows the front of the loco. What I may have to do is use a photo of a prototype that was fitted with a Collett cab before that fitment was made but otherwise matches the kit.
     
    The chassis is an intricate fret that builds up into a sturdy frame. I have cut out all the hornblocks as I'm going to use CSB suspension. One particularly clever touch was to have the two sides of the coupling rod etched one over the other so all that was needed was to fold them back to back using the half etched lines. The two sides came together perfectly aligned for soldering. The etch also includes some parts for the body such as fire irons hooks and lamp irons.
     
    No wonder the GWR championed standardisation!
  17. JDaniels

    GWR 517 0-4-2T

    By JDaniels,

    To add to my recent blogs on the subject, attached (I hope) are photos of my 517 0-4-2T, 559.
     
    This was built many years ago and has a Portescap motor with the MJT gearbox conversion.
     

     

  18. JDaniels

    GWR 517 0-4-2T

    By JDaniels,

    The Finecast kit arrived this morning, impressive when you consider I only phoned yesterday.
     
    The kit has the 15ft overall wheelbase (7ft 4in + 7ft 8in) with provision for both inside and outside bearing trailing wheels. One disdavantage is that the kit only comes with the later extended bunker although I may have one of the earlier bunkers that hopefully may fit. The full covered cab is supplied but the instructions do say that this could be modified to a half cab. The kit also includes three variants of the front steps.
     
    I don't think it's a particularly important issue but I think the outside bearing trailing wheel versions had a 15ft 6in wheelbase. The instructions refer to the final 6 locos as having the 15ft 6in wheelbase but RCTS part 6 refers to these having been built with this wheelbase from new, most of the locos originally with a 15ft wheelbase were converted to 15ft 6in so if one was pedantic none of these, either those built as new or those converted, could be built from this kit.
     
    The chassis has provision for CSB suspension and a quick look at the castings show them to be of the quality one expects from Finecast.
     
    Also included with the package I received was a note of the Nu Cast kits now also available under the joint venture between SE Finecast and Branchlines. The kits are:
     
    LNER J70 tram engine
     
    NER Class H, LNER Y7
     
    LNER Sentinel Railcar
     
    Sentinental shunter
     
    LMS Fowler 7F 0-8-0
     
    GWR Autocoach Dia A26.
     
    BR (WR) 16xx pannier.
     
    Coming soon is the GWR 2021 0-6-0 in saddle and pannier tank forms. I have one of these partly assembled.
     
    The autocoach looks interesting and despite being out of period, I have a soft spot for the 16xx pannier.
     
    I hope this is of interest.
  19. JDaniels
    I have been modelling on a semi-serious basis now since the early 1970's and in my collection of rolling stock are items that I have no recollection of buying or detailing. Some of these have absolutely no place at Blagdon so occupy a separate box to the other stock which is relevant to the Wrington Vale. That box currently hold two Airfix auto coaches, both in as built condition (with windows both ends) and detailed with the Dart Castings kit, a Stephen Poole 64xx 0-6-0PT that recently acquired a Cotswold etched chassis and the Gem Cambrian 2-4-0T, this though may find a place on a future Cambrian micro layout (Fronfraith). In addition to these is the subject of this brief article, the Siphon H, not sure whether it was Airfix or Mainline that did this but I'm quite sure that the prototype would never have found its' way to Blagdon, or any other branch line for that matter.
     
    On a related matter, I do sometimes think that as modellers we overdo the incidence of Siphons attached to branch passenger trains. My understanding is that from the 1920's on, road haulage really ate into the railways share of goods traffic using army surplus lorries and being able to collect milk direct from a farm gave road hauliers an unbeatable advantage. Blagdon was supposed to have a reasonable trade in milk but the photos I have seen show this being loaded into the guards compartment of passenger trains. The amount of milk from the whole of the Wrington Vale would hardly justify even a 6 wheel Siphon (although I do have two of those). Siphons were of course used on other traffic, the strawberry trains on the Cheddar line for example and prior to 1920 there are photographs of Siphons on passenger trains, an early photo of the Abbotsbury branch train shows a milk truck (not a Siphon) attached to the branch train. Siphons appear to have been more generally used on main line trains, either attached to an express passenger or as part of a dedicated milk train that would serve a milk processing centre (the milk having been taken from the farm to the centre by lorry)..
     
    I digress, back to the Siphon H. This was detailed all those years ago with new bogies, brake rodding, wire handrails and lamp irons, additional trussing, brake and steam pipes and screw couplings. Sorting out the models for the "non-Blagdon" box I had another look at this and thought it could be further improved with, naturally, gas pipes on the roof. I laid out the two pipes running along beside the lamps, one of smaller diameter than the other but as I don't have any information about how the feed came up from the gas cylinders I have done no more than this. If anyone can clarify how the gas reached the roof I'd love to know, the vehicle had end doors so I can't imagine they'd have reached the roof that way.. I have also noticed that those who have commented in the past on detailing this model query the bogies that were used. The Russell book has several photos of Siphon H's and all have the American 9ft variety as my model. Sadly though none of the photos show the arrangement of the plumbing on the roof.
     
    Only 20 of these vehicles were ever built so they were very rare birds indeed. The Siphon G was far more common although there were more variations over the various lots.
     
    If I was doing this again I'd certainly change the handbrake levers and maybe add a little more underframe detail. I also need to remove the inner bogie step. Ah well, the trouble with this hobby is that as you delve further the shortcomings of your work become apparent with the ncourse of time. Like many people though I like the brown vehicles and the body of the Airfix / Mainline model is excellent.
     

     
    The model was quite heavily weathered using Hubrol washes, in this case "dust" colour which, from years washing my various cars, appears to be the predominant shade of "dirt.". You can rest assured though I won't be doing this to the auto coaches.
  20. JDaniels
    Thankfully the three coaches constructed from a mixture of mainly Trains, Shire Scenes and Ratio parts are now completed and boxed ready to be handed over to the painter at Expo EM. I'm still not sure whether the quality of my work justifies the considerable expense of having them professionally painted.
     
    However this has left me with three spare Ratio chassis (two short and one long), some roofs and the sides for a composite. In addition I have many spare sides acquired in the distant past but as there are no chassis I have no idea where they came from. This set me thinking that I could make up three coaches using, for the most part, Ratio components but with the knowledge gained from using the etched components I thought I could add a fair amount of additional detail. I had the sides, end and roof of a composite that I could not use with the etched chassis, a set of sides for an all third and for the long chassis I thought I would get the Shire Scenes sides for the third brake with duckets at the end. This for no other reason than it would make a change from the usual Ratio brake third.
     
    I have made many of the Ratio coach kits before but despite this on my first coach I merrily cut off all the pips on the chassis sides, belatedly realising that some should have been retained to locate in the holes in the floor. My usual method of assembling the underframe is to locate the bearings and wheels whilst the glue is still tacky, wrapping an elastic band around each end to hold the wheelsets firmly in the bearings and then standing on a sheet of glass (a small mirror is one of my most useful tools) with some weight on the floor. However cutting off the pips did create a few problems as the elastic bands pulled the sides of the chassis in.
     
    I had hoped to preface this entry along the lines of "Detailing Ratio 4 wheel coaches without the need for the Mainly Trains kit" However I had several of the Mainly Trains Dean Churchward brake gear etches which I used so that was out of the question. I would have thought however that the parts I used would be readily available elsewhere.
     
    Taking the chassis first, I was impressed with the level of detailing in the springs and axleboxes. The brake gear however is lacking and I replaced this with parts from the Mainly Trains etch. The photo below (again apologies for my camera) shows the parts I added in their unpainted state.
     


     
    The Ratio brake blocks were drilled to take the etched brass yokes which connect each side. The V hangers, brake actuating and cylinder cranks all came from the etch all connected up with brass wire. I omitted the vertical rod connecting the yokes and the rod from the brake actuating crank as this is not visible being behind the wheel. I also added the gas filler. I noticed that some of the brake hangers were almost identical to the gas filler bracket so made up a bracket adding a piece of wire to represent the nozzle. Most of this is in fact hardly visible but it brings the chassis almost up to the same level of detail as the Mainly Trains kit. The latter does score however with the superior solebar detail which cannot be replicated with the Ratio kit. One afterthought, I added the gas pipes from the ends of the cylinders.
     
    The body is well detailed but I thought separate handrails and door handles would look better. I used handrails (or should that be commode handles) from Roxey Moulding with etched brass door handles included in the MT chassis etch. Etched brass cannot replicate faithfully a round handrail but I thought these, and the door handles in particular, vastly improved the appearance. It can be difficult to pare off the plastic handrails neatly and holes need to be drilled exactly on the line of the moulding to accomodate the etched handrails. One problem I had with one of the sides was that in trying to file down the inside to fit the MT chassis I inadvertently took off part of the outside resulting in a small chunk taken out. I used filler on this but it is still visible.
     
    The ends had a little re-working, I pared off the handrails and replaced these with wire as also with the lamp bracket. The MT kit refers to the vacuum pipe as being to the right of the coupling so this was moved over. I didn't bother to replace the alarm gear though. Whilst I can't claim all my stock has metal buffers, I don't like plastic and Markits supplied suitable turned alternatives. I felt the Ratio buffers (like the vacuum pipes) were a little puny but the Markits ones may be a little on the large side, they are after all intended for bogie stock. Oddly, those supplied in the Mainly Trains kits are even larger.
     
    Finally, the roof had the rainstrips, gas piping and associated brackets added. As I've mentioned before, bearing in mind this is the part of a coach most people see this simple step improves the appearance out of all proportion to the time taken in accomplishing it.
     
    The sides were painted all over chocolate to represent the (economy) livery many of these old coaches received in the early 1930's. The transfers are Pressfix and caused some grief. The Pressfix sheets I used were years old and had lost their adhesion with the result that separate letters tended to float about on a film of water. The numbers were an absolute pig and I resorted to varnishing each number separately before fixing the next one. I do find it irritating that you need to buy a whole sheet, and they're not cheap, knowing that the 95% you won't be using can't be stored for any length of time.
     
    The result is shown below (using my wifes' camera this time):
     

     
    The transfer film shows up far more on the photo than it does to the naked eye.
     
    The all third is well under way although the chassis awaits its' Gibson wheels. This has been painted chocolate and cream but in researching the details of this livery I made an interesting discovery. I always assumed the two colours were divided by a black and gold line. In fact whilst this was the case with prestige coaches, on lesser stock the colours were separated by a yellow line only. Fox supplied suitable transfers.The brake third has a completed chassis but the sides are currently unavailable.
     
    On a separate matter, whilst looking at the Markits website I noticed that they did GWR loco buffers with a larger head. Whilst I'm very pleased with my model of 5807 from the Puffers etched kit the effect is ruined by the ridiculously small buffers supplied that, stupidly, I fitted without a second thought. For years I've been looking for large buffer heads with shafts that will fit the existing base, as the loco was painted professionally (by Larry Goddard) replacing the whole buffer assembly was out of the question. Joy of joys, the Markits ones fit and even though I can't spring them as the chassis prevents this, the improved appearance is remarkable. The Markits website is well worth a look.
     
    I hope other modellers find these notes useful. There seems to be a lack of detailed knowledge of these coaches which results in the differences between kits of supposedly the same prototype. The MT kit has very detailed instructions and using the information gleaned from these I have been able to improve the Ratio kit.
  21. JDaniels
    Having assembled the two brakes, I turned, with some trepidation, to the composite. This uses the Ratio sides and I was concerned that as these were thicker than the etched brass the problems with clearances might be more acute. Also as they were plastic I couldn't be so carefree with the soldering iron and I was concerned that gluing might not give as good a bond as solder.
     
    With the brake thirds I soldered the sides to the ends and then, allowing for the slight overlap of the sides over the solebars, located the L shaped bracket that would take the fixing screws securing the body to the chassis. As I was concerned that the plastic sides would not take kindly to the heat, I soldered the brackets to the ends first. By using the roof as a guide, I estimated the correct position of the sides against the ends and allowing for that slight overlap of the solebar soldered the brackets to the end without the sides in place. Locating the roof showed that the sides were at the very limit of the width allowable by the roof so I filed the end of the sides down to reduce the thickness where they located against the "wings" and therefore the overall width. This had the advantage that the ends would more closely match the brakes which used the thinner Shire Scene sides. The next step was to Araldite the sides to the ends, I was grateful that the Shire Scene ends had the wings that folded out to give a greater area for the adhesive. Once again I located the roof in position just to ensure the sides and ends were located in the correct position.
     
    Once the Araldite had completely set I then tried locating the body assembly to the floor. This was the point I had problems before, I can only think the width of the MT floor is greater than that in the Ratio kit as the body tends to sit on, rather than slightly overlapping the floor. Oddly the problem more or less resolved itself as the "wings" to which the sides are secured were at the top and halfway up the height of the body. The bottom of the ends, which weren't fixed, bowed out slightly to fit over the solebars. With the sides and ends in the correct position I filled the gaps at the bottom of the join between the ends and sides with Araldite whilst the body was located on the chassis. Having satisfied myself that the body was correctly located on the floor, I marked the holes for the 8BA screws, drilled the holes and soldered the 8BA nuts to the top of the bracket, ensuring the soldering iron did not linger longer than was necessary. Whilst I hadn't intended to fix the compartment partitions in place at this stage, I thought that as the assembly only relied on adhesive rather than solder, fixing the central partition would add strength. The photo shows the body at this stage, the internal soldering looking a little neater than on the brake thirds.
     

     
    Now the time came to fix the roof, as will be apparent it would be impossible to solder the nuts on the brackets with the roof in place. The one slight hiccup was the partition, this was slightly too wide causing the sides to bow out slightly in the centre. This was simply solved by cutting a section out of the partition and placing a new piece of Plasticard over the gap once the roof was in place. As it was the roof only just covered both sides but once fixed with plastic glue (sides) and Araldite (ends) the whole assembly was quite rigid. The photo shows the coach virtually complete. For once, this coach was more straightforward than I expected.
     

     
    Apologies for the focussing but a macro lens is out of my budget.
     
    I had wondered just how much the MT chassis kits adds to the appearance of the Ratio sides so for comparison I attach two photos, broadside views of the unpainted composite and another of an old Ratio kit (in the livery for 1902) assembled as per instructions.
     

     

     

    I think from most viewpoints there is little difference between the two. IMHO the Ratio kit can be improved by just two simple steps, adding the gas lighting pipes (as will be evident from the photo, something I am doing on all my old coaches) and paring off the end handrails and substituing them for brass wire looping round on to the carriage roof. I also have a set of the same three coaches in post 1927 simplified chocolate and cream and these do have basic brake rigging added. Again though from most angles this underframe detail just cannot be seen. To my mind the ends are the biggest drawback of the Ratio kit, not the underframe. There is no doubt that the etched ends, whether MT or Shirescenes, look better with the pipework etc. added separately rather than moulded on. The stepboards of the Ratio kit are also a drawback, not because they're not realistic, they are far too fragile.
     
    I don't know what other GWR modellers do but I'm never sure what colour to paint the roof. Yes there is the odd photo of a pristine white coach roof but more usually they seem to be shades of grey depending on how long the coach has been in service since its' last repaint. I've alternated between painting the roof white and then weathering it or just painting it a light shade of grey. Common sense dictates that the roof started white and would weather unevenly (i.e. with blotches and streaks) but photos show an even grey colour.
     
    Finally, recent blog entries by MikeOxon prompted me to search out a photo I took of the side of a BG coach at a Bristol Museum (I think it's called the "M Shed" now) which I had forgotten about. It's remarkable that this has survived for so long and gives us a real insight into the liveries and construction of coaches built over 150 years ago. The coach was probably withdrawn in 1870 and is in the same condition as it was then.
     

     

    Because this is not on a preserved railway it is probably not as well known as it should be.
     
    Hope this is of interest.
  22. JDaniels
    I was going to write something this evening but the rain has driven me out of the garden. Hopefully I have more success with railway modelling than I do with growing clematis!
     
    The second brake coach is now almost finished and ready (just about) for painting. A photo is attached. As with the first coach, glazing and handrails will be fitted after painting.
     
    Unfortunately it's not quite the same as the first brake as I dispensed with the ends that came with the underframe kit. The ends are, for some reason, etched in very thin brass, you could cut paper with the edge. Shire Scenes do etched ends that have the advantage of "wings" that locate against the sides making it far easier to solder and they are also more substantial. With the MT ends I had to strengthen the join with fillets of brass angle and because of the thickness of the metal the ends flex and eventually the constant mauling to get a decent fit created so many creases and folds I realised that they were only fit for scrap after so many attempts.
     
    What I didn't appreciate until I received the Shire Scenes ends was just how different th detail is from those in the MT chassis kit. Taking the step end first, the steps are far larger than those in the MT kit. They do however have a better fixing with a tab that folds up enabling the step to be soldered against the back of the coach end. This also made it easier to solder the inside fixing bracket as it was against an almost flush surface.The Shire Scenes sides also had rivet detail and an etched lamp bracket, the latter I replaced with brass rod suitably flattened and filed to represent the flat surface as the etched ones wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes.
     
    At the other end, the communicating cord gear, the rod across the top of the end, was represented by etched brass in the Shire Scenes kit. I replaced this with brass rod and also used from the MT kit the small fold up box that is just to the right of the centre line and from which a vertical rod goes down to underneath the buffer beam. Another difference between the kits, this box on the Shire Scenes end is to the left of the centre line. The release lever for the alarm gear was again taken from the MT kit. Again the position on the end of the coach is slightly different between the two kits, MT show this as being along the line of the moulding, Shire Scenes as above the moulding. Again I used the MT part positioned along the moulding. The alarm gong is not represented in the Shire Scenes kit and MT do not have what I think is an accurate representation of the gong which from photographs was quite elegantly shaped. I used a small washer as the MT gong is quite fiddly to make. A white metal casting would have been better.
     
    So all in all the ends are something of a hybrid. Looked at separately no one would notice any difference between the ends of the two coaches (the steps are the most prominent difference) but if viewed end on together the size of the steps is quite noticeable. Once everything is completed I may look at replacing the smaller steps on the first coach I completed (the Shire Scenes sides do have a number of spares) but with the roof now fixed that may be impossible.
     
    It may be that the MT and Shire Scenes ends were produced from different drawings but the differences I encountered do show that we can't assume the kit we have lovingly built is an accurate model but given the number of different designs of 4 wheel coaches this is hardly surprising. I remembered only this morning that I do have a scanned copy of an old article in Backtrack with photos of some 4 wheel coaches as colliery trains and one photo confirmed that the steps were larger than MT show, although not perhaps quite as large as Shire Scenes. I wouldn't have fancied trying to climb up either of those steps! At the other end the box on the communicating cord gear was on the right, as MT show. However it is quite likely that other designs may have been different.
     
    Now that Mainly Trains have ceased trading I'm fortunate to have the kits at all but I really hope that someone, maybe Shire Scenes, can take over the artwork and produce a complete kit (chassis, sides and ends). The Ratio coaches came out, probably in the 1980's, when nothing similar was available and were enthusiatically received. However plastic might be fine for the sides but in common with the many wagon kits it cannot represent the fine detailing of the brake gear and other chassis features. To my mind though the most noticeable flaw is the omission of the gas piping on the roof. What part of a coach is the most viewed? There was an excellent article on the GWR modelling website by Steve Farrow that included much useful information on the layout of the piping which I used.
     
    What would be ideal is to have the MT chassis which looks to me very accurate, Shire Scenes sides are also very accurate (although some are not true to prototype to accomodate the Ratio chassis) but new ends would defintely be needed, slightly wider so the sides fit over, rather than on, the solebars. The roof would be simple, a sheet of plasticard maybe with information as to the positioning of rainstrips, gas lights and associated piping. It wouldn't be that difficult and making such a kit where all the components were designed to fit each other would be a pleasure, not the expensive chore that frankly this has become.
  23. JDaniels
    I haven't yet worked out how to attach a photo to a reply so in response to Mikkel's comment I attach a photo of the inside of the first almost completed coach.
     
    Unfortunately my camera and lens is better at landscapes than close ups but I hope this shows how I tackled the fitting of the body to the chassis. The folded tabs on the ends are no good as using these means that the ends, and consequently the sides, sit on top of the floor. I cut these off and made my own tabs out of brass sheet bent to an L shape. The shorter side is held against the ends with the longer side resting on the floor. When the position is correct, i.e. the ends and sides are just overlapping the floor, the shorter side of the L is soldered to the end. In retrospect the angle of the "L" could be a little more than 90 degrees to accomodate the slight tumblehome on the ends. The steps on one end don't help in getting a good fit between the new bracket and the end but I filled the gap with some scrap brass.
     
    Having accomplished this I then turned my attention to the holes for the screws located at each end. These had already been drilled through the floor so it was a simple matter to mark the position of the holes on the bracket, drill through the bracket, and firmly solder the 8BA nuts on the top of the bracket. A good tip in the instructions was to use cocktail sticks to locate the nuts through the holes which avoids soldering up the threads.
     
    I hope the photo and the explanation clarifies. I hope the finished coaches justify the huge amount of time and expense incurred in contrsucting them.
  24. JDaniels
    Just thought I'd share progress on the GWR 4 wheel coaches. These utilise the Mainly Trains chassis, Shire Scenes sides for the brake thirds and Ratio sides for the composite.
     
    I'll start off by saying this is probably the most difficult modelling exercise I've ever done. Nothing wrong with the chassis or the sides, it's when you mix the two together that problems occur. When you put them together it results in what my dear late Dad would call a "b*****s muddle." It seems I won't be doing much else this winter.
     
    I've temporarily abandoned the composite and will need another Ratio kit. I soldered, no welded, the sides to the roof with the sides tucked inside the ends. In that position though the sides sit on top of the solebars rather than just overlapping them, doesn't sound much but it looks totally wrong. I tried filing the inside of the sides down (to nothing) but still no joy, they can't be persuaded to fit over the solebars. The only way to solve this problem is to separate the roof from the sides and re-fit them outside the ends so the sides are spaced wider apart but because the roof is so firmly fixed to them that is impossible. I'm concerned too that when the three coaches are seen together the composite will look different from the other two because of the thicker plastic sides.
     
    Putting the composite to one side I had a look at the brake thirds which use the thinner Shire Scenes sides. Originally again I fixed the sides inside the ends but encountering the same problem I had to resolder them so they were outside the ends. It was very difficult to get a neat join between the two but once I did I soldered some small brass angle into the joint to strengthen it. The ends have a section at the bottom that folds over to create a bracket for fixing to the floor. However this then locates the ends far too high, solder the sides to the ends so they abut the roof and you have a clear gap between the base of the sides and the floor. I therefore had to cut these fixings off and made up some new L shaped brackets which I would fit once everything looked OK. Getting everything OK was again difficult. not only did the end / side join have to be neat but I also had to make sure the sides fitted snugly under the roof eaves. Once I had a box comprising ends and sides (the roof would be fixed later but I made sure it fitted correctly) it took a lot of fiddling to get the ends to just slide over the solebars, it also made a mockery of my careful attempts to roll the tumblehome before I started this work. Once the position looked right I soldered the L shaped brackets to the ends (and also the sides), the small arm against the end, the longer one resting on the floor covering the holes for the 8BA screws.This would locate the whole body assembly in the correct position on the floor. I then marked the position of the holes on the bracket (from underneath), drilled the holes through the bracket and fixed 8BA nuts on top of it. This meant I could separate the body from the chassis to glaze the windows and add partitions after painting and the carefully aligned screw holes should mean the sides go back in the correct position. As I am getting these coaches professionally painted, I made sure that the nuts and brackets were firmly soldered, it was easy to do this whilst the roof was off, it will be impossible once it is fixed with Araldite.
     
    Talking about the roof, my intention was to use two spares that I had. It appears though that the design had changed and one of the spares did not fit the sides as well as the current version. That means another kit required, just for the roof.
     
    I had to tidy up the ends again, soldering the sides to them had resulted in some of the steps and piping coming away. I also had to file cutouts for the two steps that are fixed to the buffer beam, the ends had to be lower but the steps would then have obstructed them.
     
    I attach a photo of one of the brake thirds, it would be easy to show the sides only but in fairness I thought I should also show the less than perfect end. The roof isn't fixed and I need to add the gas lamp piping (there is an excellent article on the GWR modelling website that details the arrangement of pipes) and couplings but otherwise it is complete. I've now sorted the sides on the second brake third so after a few evenings cleaning up that will be finished once I get some plastic rod and couplings.
     
    I'd reiterate again that this has been a painful and difficult exercise, far more difficult than any etched loco kit I've built. The ends need a lot of hacking to get a decent fit, possibly because the chassis kit is designed for many applications but is not quite right for any one. As so often the case though, if I was doing this again I know I'd make a better job of it, trust me though I won't be doing it again!.
  25. JDaniels
    I bought three of the Mainly Trains 4 wheel coach kits along with the Ratio composite kit and two sets of Shirescenes sides. The intention is to have a superdetailed three coach set.
     
    I've completed the three chassis and I have to say they went together reasonably well. If anyone does purchse them I'd make one recommendation. Do not glue the solebar overlays to the floor assembly. It was perhaps my fault in using Araldite past it's "best before" date but I found it best to solder them. It is somewhat annoying that once fitted the solebar has to be filed to size along it's length and this treatment will certainly show just how well it is fixed hence my soldering recommendation. It follows on from this that the white metal spring assembly should be left off till the solebars are soldered or one runs the risk of melting the white metal. A photo of one of the chassis is attached.
     
    The kit is very well detailed, in particular the solebar has all the necessary rivet detail and even the gas tank gauge, this was a white dial on the solebar and is prominent in many photos. The Ratio kit as it stands is certainly good above the solebar but underneath it is a little lacking.
     
    I haven't made any etched kits for a while but doing this has certainly rekindled my enthusiasm. There's something inherently satisfying in bonding metal securely together in seconds without resorting to smelly and unreliable adhesive. I might even get that kit of "Lady Margaret" some time.
     
    Or I might not. Mrs. D and I visited Gaugemaster at Ford last week to pick up the second lot of Code 75FB rail I ordered. It was a little frustrating as I ordered two packs, was told the rail was in several weeks ago, went down to find only one had been delivered. Two weeks ago I was told the second pack was in so we duly went back to Ford. I have to admit though any opportunity to visit Arundel and walk along the river to the "Black Rabbit" is one we are happy to take. We get to Ford and Mrs. D surprisingly says she'll come into the shop. I show her the display of Bachman locos pointing out they are better detailed than most kits you could buy and finished to a standard a professional painter would be proud of. Only problem is that the wheels are too close together. Mrs. D yawns. We wander around and my eyes are drawn to their O gauge exhibit, a Dapol LBSC Terrier in SR green. I have to say I was spellbound, the detailing was unbelievable and the finish superb. The staff kindly brought it out for inspection and even Mrs. D was very impressed, enthusiastic even. It was priced at £ 225 which considering Bachman OO gauge locos are well into three figures I thought was very good value. The wagons that go with it are similarly very well detailed but at £ 44 I thought they were a little expensive when compared with OO gauge offerings. When we got home I had a look at the Dapol website and their gallery shows the Terrier in a variety of liveries, I defy anyone not to look at the version in LBSC Improved Engine "Green" and not be impressed.
     
    Whenever I have been to a model railway exhibition I've always walked away thinking that O gauge looks far better than 4mm, the locos move in a manner more like the real thing, it must be the greater bulk. I also think that in 7mm every detail can be shown. To me it's a case of 4mm still being a toy, 7mm a model. I still don't think I'll move up yet, space is a problem, but if Dapol bring out a very small GWR loco (they do a 64xx / 74xx pannier) then I would be sorely tempted. Also, whilst I enjoy making kits it must be nice to be able to buy a superb ready to run model.
     
    I'd be interested to hear what others think but would recommend having a look at the Dapol gallery. I also believe Heljan are making some impressive O gauge models.
×
×
  • Create New...