Jump to content

Tim Lewis

Members
  • Posts

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tim Lewis

  1. Thanks John. I first got interested in Coldstream from the pictures of the station building in the book "Border Country Branch Line Album", and I too was very disappointed to find that the main building had been demolished. All that's left now are the two blocks of station cottages and one of the bridge abutments. Until fairly recently, the octagonal auction mart was still there, but was also demolished (in the early 2010s I think) - I was surprised at this as I thought it was a listed building. I will probably get one of the TMC/Bachmann G5s when they come out, as they were quite common on the Tweed Valley line, but I need to finish my London Road Models one first (see workbench thread). This will eventually be finished as E7304, and if I get another it will either be 67303 or 67248. Cheers for now.
  2. I decided to pass on this as I found it difficult to justify one at Coldstream in 1949, but it does look like a lovely model of a very interesting prototype.
  3. Does anyone know when these began to appear on the Eastern/Scottish Regions? The only photo I recall seeing is the one reproduced above which is at Millerhill in 1963.
  4. Ooh - some nice etched NPCCS to look forward to. I've got one in the drawer (can't remember which one off the top of my head) from years ago, but it would be rude not to have at least one more.
  5. Dangerously close to "one year since last post" time, so here's a bit of an update... I haven't actually done any modelling for several months now - we're having some work done to the house and all the railway stuff is packed away. However, before packing stuff away, I did make some progress on the station cottages. For reference, here's what the real cottages look like (pictures taken in 1990): Some of the windows and doors are modern, and not appropriate to my period of interest, and the small windows show "new" internal bathrooms, again not relevant to my time period. The windows of the middle cottage are however, the same as in the 1950s as far as I can tell, though the door is slightly different. Here are all the pieces shown in the post above put together in the appropriate way, mainly embossed plasticard laminated with double sided tape onto plain 40 thou: After a coat of primer, this shows the row of transverse bricks (hand scribed 60 x 125 thou) on top of the rear yard walls: This shows the cottages in situ on the layout following a coat of brick red and a dilute mortar course (but not yet any further weathering). There is another chimney stack to go on yet. The other block of 4 cottages is just a card mock-up at present. There are several detail differences between the two blocks (they were built at different times) - windows, lintels, outhouses, chimney pots etc. Of course, there are no commercially available windows of the correct size, so I've been experimenting with scratchbuilding window frames and doors from various thicknesses of microstrip and plasticard, and after several goes have finally arrived at something I'm happy with (with temporary glazing and not fixed in yet): So, that's as far as I got before packing it away. Hopefully will get back to it soon. Quite enjoying this building lark (though not as much fun as making wagons!).
  6. Thanks all for the replies about the D67 horseboxes. All my railway stuff is packed away at the moment, but I was intrigued by UpDistant's comments so dug out the Tatlow NPCS drawings book. The sample list referred to (of D67s that "survived" into LNER days) actually totals around 120 vehicles, including a contiguous block of around 50, which I would guess are the later (1911 or so) builds. (Incidentally, length-wise, the D67s and later D196s were the same, but the LNER builds were longer). Many types of horseboxes were quite long lived, so I wouldn't bet against some D67s making it to Nationalisation, but it would be nice to have definitive proof. I know that quite a number of D196s did - UpDistant has listed a few, I have pictures of 179 and 227 plus some unidentifiable ones, and I think there are several more in one of David Larkin's books (which again isn't to hand at the moment). Any further thoughts or info on the D67s would be welcomed.
  7. Wow, Kier, you've been busy! I really like the station extension idea - will give some good opportunities for stopping passenger trains. Will you have working tube trains as well once it's finished? Hopefully get to see it sometime later this year, pandemic permitting! Cheers.
  8. I like the D67 horsebox. I have one in the drawer to build sometime, along with a couple of the other NER design that D&S did (the one with the funny roof (as seen on the left in Daddyman's picture above) was it D196? - all my railway stuff is inaccessible at the moment due to some building work going on at the house). However, do you know how long the D67s lasted? I seem to remember that the D&S instructions aren't conclusive about dates. I know the D196s lasted well into BR (my period of interest is just after Nationalisation), but I don't recall ever seeing a photo of a D67 at work. Frustratingly, the recent Hugh Longworth book doesn't include ex-NER horseboxes (whilst it does include horseboxes from some of the other constituent companies). So, I'd be interested on any information/photos showing D67s if any one can help. Thanks.
  9. Happily, Dave Bradwell is alive and well (and does design excellent kits). I suspect you may be thinking of Dave Alexander, who passed away last year sometime.
  10. I'm a big fan of this method of drive. I've made a couple of locos like this (J25 and J39), though my efforts are very poorly engineered somewhat Heath Robinson like bodges compared to Frank's superbly constructed examples- but they work, both locos run very nicely!
  11. A few more J25 pictures for micklner. I don't remember too much about the construction as it was a long time ago now, though I do remember it was quite hard work, with very little help in locating things and some tabs and slots not lining up properly etc. I think this just reflects the age of the kit, which must have been designed in the late 70s or so I reckon. Anyway, here's a view of the underside of the tender - there is a lot of lead partly because the springs are relatively heavy gauge wire and need a bit of weighting down (maybe I'll change to a lighter gauge at some point, but it runs well now so I'm not in an hurry to change it). I had to cut some of the tender floor away to make space for the motor and the chip : and the underside of the loco body: Mick has mentioned the absence of the sloping bit of the coal space in the kit - this may well be true, but I don't remember it as it was always the intention to run with a full coal load to hide the motor in the tender, and the motor sits where the sloping bit would be: An example of the poor fit of tabs and slots is the join between firebox and footplate, however, I think the prototype has a piece of metal along this join (possibly the top of the frames?) which I've not put on yet, and which should help to disguise it a bit: I used the smokebox door casting and etched straps from the kit and initially used a smokebox door dart from (I think) Crownline: Later on, I replaced the smokebox dart with a homemade version using two Gibson shoulderless handrail knobs, squeezed a bit to make them flatter, which i think was an improvement: I don't have any more pictures, but hope these are of some use. Cheers.
  12. Hi, Do you mean these ones? The one on the left is a NER 17T wagon to diagram P6, perpetuated by the LNER as Diagram 11. You don't see many prototype photos of these, but there were over 5000 built, with nearly 2000 still around at Nationalisation, according to Tatlow. The other two are the much later LNER diagram 193 slope-sided 13T wagons: despite the rather archaic appearance, these were built between 1944-47. All three are scratchbuilt from 1/32" basswood, with plasticard strapping and individual bolt head detail from Grandt Line and Tichy Trains. The boltheads on the strapping are simply "embossed" with a sharp(-ish) point from behind. To add some much needed weight, the P6 has a lead floor (and brakegear from Slaters/Ambis) whilst the 193s have cast whitemetal floors and brakegear from David Geen. Here are a couple of pictures before painting/detailing: Not sure I got the buffers right on the Diagram 193s, and the last one of the P6 reminds me that I originally built it with a Slater's brake lever and guide, since replaced that with Ambis etches. Also, it looks like I didn't use the "embossing" method here, but drilled individual holes, inserted a bit of micro-rod and cut it off - a sufficiently mind-numbing exercise that I now use the embossing method, which has to be about 500 times quicker and just as effective. Hope this helps.
  13. I've found some of the J25 photos. I don't have any from the early part of the build (don't think I ever did have), but hopefully some of these will be useful. Firstly, here some views of the chassis and drive train, starting with an overall view: Mashima 1628 (I think) in the tender driving High Level box (can't remember which) on centre axle. Split frame construction, hence the plastic 'sheet' in the tender to avoid any shorts. UJs were from FourMil - don't think these are available now, but you can probably get them elsewhere. Box is restrained from too much movement by a bit of wire wrapped around the top bolt, which is then clipped through holes in the frames: Another view showing some of the home-made phosphor-bronze springing - crude but effective: Underneath view of the loco chassis, again note home-made springing arrangement: Underneath view of tender chassis: motor rests on a blob of silicon sealant on the middle spacer: Another view of tender chassis showing PB springs, which also transfer current from the hornblocks to the frames, then there are wires from frame to motor. Not shown here, but wheels have shorting strips between rim and (split) axle: Loco frames without wheels, showing fusewire axle retainers. Although the loco chassis has insulated spacers, I haven't bothered to pickup from the loco, as it works perfectly fine just using the tender, and avoids having to trail wires from loco to motor in tender: Painted/weathered: More to come later on.....
  14. Hi Mick, Yes the original instructions are a bit of a waste of time - as you have discovered , the tender instructions are by Nike! I got some updated instructions from John Redrup at London Road Models ([email protected]) - about 15 pages of instructions and the same of exploded diagrams if I remember right. If you don't have any joy via that route then I can scan mine and send them to you, but all my railway stuff is packed away at present (we're having some work done on the house), so I may not be able to do that for a while - they're also full of my scribbles. Let me know if you want me to do that. I can't see the old photos either - perhaps they got lost in a forum upgrade or something. I should still have them on the laptop somewhere - I'll see if I can find and re-post some of them, hopefully they'll be easy to find. I don't have any very recent pictures of the J25, other than the one in the post a few above, but I haven't done any work on it for a very long time. Cheers.
  15. Excellent weathering on the Q6. What did you use?
  16. I would be interested in a P4-compatible version of the body. I have a Branch lines chassis stashed away in the drawer.
  17. Here's something that's been puzzling me.... A few months ago, this consignment note was for sale on e-bay. I didn't buy it but a friend of mine sent me a picture of it as he knew I was interested in Coldstream. As you can see, it details a consignment of 3 cattle wagons to be sent from Coldstream to Bradford on 11 March 1949. The first (196357) is an LNER Diagram 122 and the third (302589) is probably an LMS diagram 1840 (possibly 1661). It is the middle one that is of interest. My first reaction was "Oh, excellent, that proves the use of ex-NER cattle wagons at Coldstream in my period of interest", but then I thought "wait a minute, the NER didn't have any 'Large' cattle wagons" (they were all medium). A bit of trawling through the relevant volume of Tatlow shows that the wagon listed (106836) was actually a Diagram G2 ordinary covered van. Now, I thought it was against the rules to transport cattle in anything other than a cattle wagon, so what's going on? I would be very interested to hear people's thoughts on this. Cheers for now.
  18. I haven't been able to find that reference on the SCRAN website (which I'd never heard of till just now!). Incidentally, there are a couple of pictures in the Middleton (or is it Oakwood) Press book of the Tweed Valley Line. From memory one of the Flying Scotsman (A4) and one of the Queen of Scots (A3), both at Kelso (IIRC, I've not actually got the book). Also, the line was used for diversions for a period in 1956, though I don't have precise dates. Edit - found it now (I hadn't put all the zeroes in the reference when I first searched).
  19. Apologies if you've said already and I missed it, but where are you getting the etched roofs from. Thanks.
  20. I'm not 100% certain, but I seem to remember that a Preston to Blackpool service was the 180? (This would be mid-60s or thereabouts)
  21. Oooh, now this (i.e. the 3D printed stuff) looks like an interesting development. I do like building Rumney Models stuff, but it has to be said, it's not necessarily a very quick process! Methods of speeding up builds are therefore of interest (so I can make more of them). The absolutely key thing though (for me at least) is the "not at the expense of quality". In the last year or two I've seen quite a lot of new products on the market where people are 3D printing or laser-cutting things simply because the technology allows them to, rather than because it's the most appropriate way of producing a realistic representation of whatever prototype. In many cases the quality and finesse is just not there IMHO. Having said that, I'm sure that with the exacting standards that you set yourself, the Rumney Models products will continue to be excellent. Certainly the trial prints look very good indeed (assuming they're 4mm). I look forward to seeing further developments. All the best.
  22. Just the normal 2mm spacing washers from Alan Gibson. I used 2.75mm each side on front and rear, and 2.5mm each side on the centre. Note however that I did file the boss off the back of the drivers first (later decided it wasn't necessary, but I'd done it by then), so if you didn't do this then fewer washers would be needed. One day I may get around to some cosmetic frames.
  23. Hi Mark, Yes, I have kept the Hornby chassis. It has 2mm axles for the drivers (and the tender wheels). Colin at Alan Gibson has now done the correct wheels for 2mm axles - I don't think they've appeared on the list yet but they're certainly available, so give him a call if need be. The inside of the splashers measured something like 21.7mm (if I remember correctly, didn't make a note of it at the time) and I widened this to around 22.5 or thereabouts, which seemed to be enough. For the gouging I used the tools below: Most of the work was done in fairly agricultural fashion using the round burr/cutter (don't know if it has a proper name) in the middle of the picture, then used the sanding/cutting disc to smooth off a bit. I used the smaller thinner burr on the small crankpin splashers, though I'm not sure this was absolutely necessary. I also gouged a bit of a channel along the underside of the footplate (using the cutting disc) to provide a bit of extra clearance for the rods - again, I'm not sure this was really necessary. The end result looks a bit of a mess underneath, but it does the job: (I've no idea why the picture above is in a portrait orientation, the original is landscape). I need to do some more adjustment of the pickups, but the tender pickups do a pretty good job by themselves. Unfortunately yes, it is possible to gouge through - I got a bit over-ambitious/careless on one of the splashers, so a bit of tidying up will be required. However, I did have it running perfectly well before I gouged through, so it is possible to complete the job without making a mess of it! The re-wheeled J36 runs pretty well though it is essentially a rigid chassis so gives an occasional jolt at some track joints - it may be possible to engineer a little bit of vertical movement in the Hornby chassis (there is virtually none as it comes), but I haven't bothered with this as yet at least. All in all, a pleasing conversion and a useful addition to the loco roster. The rods aren't brilliant, and I'd quite like to change them. Perhaps that nice Mr. Franks might like to oblige. Just need to decide which class member to model now! Hope this is useful. Cheers for now.
  24. Thanks for that Mick: I'll bear that in mind next time I need a small motor (though Mashima's are getting hard to come by of course).
×
×
  • Create New...