richbrummitt

I found that cattle vans seem to go wonky or wobbly on DLP printer whatever I did. I believe that due to the geometry being requested (large open areas and relatively thin sections with unsupported areas) and the way the printer works it is a question of how much the distortion could be reduced. Eventually I realised that I was introducing more distortion during the removal from the build plate regardless of how careful I was being using the thinnest of blades and curing the prints whilst still attached to the build plate reduced the final distortion significantly.

Agree, size dependant. A tall one would need an appropriately long Macaw or other bolster wagons. Presumably the branches would be roped/strapped to achieve the same tight bunch that a net achieves today. Maybe someone somewhere has a photograph…

How do you plan to paint the chassis?

Some other differences though, which you might care about, and the detail on the association kit is really rather heavy when compared today. If you can justify some Welsh iron bodied goods vans let me know . I too converted the association kit by filing the doors smooth to create a CONE. @Ian Smith, I might have sent you two different bodies; I modelled both a long and short version of the bonnet. The HMRS tome has some info on this detail.

I’ve used plywood and also mount board. Neither have been ballasted yet though.

I’ve finally put some of my 3DP OK axle box and spring combinations on a handful of wagons. I’d say they look more than ok (had to get in there first with that one). The roof has been tried on for size and is clearly far too large. The wagon body is a minor reworking of an @Ian Smith CAD model.

First off well done on getting some prints out. The covered wagon seems pretty close to being a great print and it has avoided any visible stepping on the roof. There will usually be some movement during curing and the open wagon has moved in the directions that would be expected. You can jig it whilst curing; insert some kind of plug. I would expect ~2min to be sufficient for curing but it will depend on how much UV exposure the surfaces are getting. It is simple enough to do a bit and see if it feels cured (not tacky) and put it in a bit longer if it needs and so on. You will get a feel for your equipment fairly quickly that way. Occasionally I leave supports on because they can help retain the shape in certain instances but this will be by design. For some models I wash and cure the prints whilst still attached to the build plate. For those models that I found required this treatment (to reduce movement during cure) I still removed many of the supports after washing.

N brass locos list chain at 48links/in. I think it is very similar to some that Fleetline used to market. I’ve used the Fleetline stuff for securing chains on a number of wagons and think it looks okay.

My feeling is Westbury would be more likely than Swindon, but you have yet to write the history of the N&S Rly post amalgamation. Was it like the M&SWJR; ignored/neglected?

Best not check his socks then...

It would. I've frequently pondered the idea of a layout presented entirely in sepia or monochrome. It's no more likely to get very far than any of my other recent (last 20 years efforts).

I had the same feeling. Then I couldn’t find the ones I’m pretty sure I started to check. I do have many part consumed 2-327 etches on my workbench though (the main parts and levers are being used on some 3DP wagons) and I measure the solebars as a smidge under 28mm. Hopefully that nugget of info is helpful.

I spent a while considering where the sun might be and how shaded the side we are viewing was. It probably is black. The book on GWR structure colours, by Richard North (GWSG) covers the period 1912-1947 and tells us that spear fencing likely to be interacted with by the public, as here, was varnished black or tarred. However it also tells us that stone tint no.2 was also in use at the beginning of the period covered. Who is to say that at Farthing they used stone tint 3 or 4! There was local variation on windows and valences.

One thought: Is it too late to change the colour of the fence to stone?

I think the vertical resolution is more limiting than the screen resolution. Some 4K printers might be better for that. I recommend that you ensure that the print area is large enough for whatever you would like the machine to print. The prices seem to be somewhat proportionate to screen size and that might move the affordability scales in a particular direction. You might also decide that a wash station is essential and if bench/cupboard space is tight could impact your final decision. A mono screen is definitely better.

I believe anyone in the first category is accomplished in particular aspects of their modelling - as you clearly are. It is worth remembering that many people do not share the trials and mistakes to reach anything that does get shared. We can learn from our own mistakes and those of others. Those that fall into your first category have almost certainly been in the second for quite some time.

It's not just small children: At places like Salisbury the platforms are curved enough for large children to have dropped through. Then there are those stations where the height of the platform changes along the length; our local station has a noticeably lower platform height on the up side everywhere except the last 2-3 coaches of the train (where the buildings are). It cannot be the only one.

That is certainly the case for the Newberry container in the centre of a much published image of Newbury station prior to the rebuilding (to 4 tracks). It's the first one on the disused stations website.

Books on the Thame branch give the year of first car loaded to rail as 1919, at Littlemore. The Cowley plant and associated rail provision grew significantly over the following decade with Morris Cowley station being provided with proper buildings &c. in, iirc, 1928.

Did you already review the magazine article by the late Pete Wright, also reproduced in Loco bits and pieces, called 'Skirl o' the pipes'?

Thin/small. I can get supported detail (stanchions etc) down below 0.2 but it won’t really support itself for cleaning if I try anything self supporting at that thickness on the Elegoo Mars 2P I have. I would expect on an Anycubic Photon you can get down to 0.4mm self supporting without too many issues apart from the one you already identified - prints are super fragile in those thin areas. I have certainly managed this for open wagons with 0.4 and 0.5mm thickness sides and I got those files from people with Photon printers.

Off the back of the war, followed by amalgamation of railways, strikes etc. I have to agree - especially when the GWR regularly dipped into its reserves to pay the shareholders during these fallow years.

You appear to have asked the right questions. This once again shows that fidelity matters to you and is why (I believe) so many follow and contribute here.

Yes. The ‘stock photo’ on the previous page is the same tank taken from the platform rather than the car park and also shows it without the black band on the outlet. My guess is that the modern paint is not as robust and additional protection has been added for the kind of heat a localised fire can output. The edges are a far too neat for a scorched patch. It is only a guess.

I’ve managed this with sticky label wrappers - scoring before cutting for removal from the backing - as a trial for a weighbridge building. Whilst it was reasonably successful it was definitely tricky due to the sizes involved and the wrapper wanting to stick everywhere all at once. I understand your reluctance to accept this as a solution but it might be manageable to do sections of wall between successive down pipes or other features that would adequately disguise the joins.