Jump to content

Huw Griffiths

Ruston Quays

Recommended Posts

If that is standard gauge, the Wills setts are more than a foot long!

 

indeed Joseph!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of electronics questions.

 

This months article on wiring the Gaugemaster Shuttle system has seen a couple of questions come my way.

 

Question 1 -  believe I am correct in saying that your 2nd circuit diagram showing 3 alternative stopping points will not work as you intend.
The train will always stop at the 1st track break and, if the switch is open, it cannot be driven out.
The two switches should be in parallel with their respective diodes, so that when made will allow the train to run on to the next break; but cause the train to stop at that break if the switch is open.
 

Sidingdiodes.jpg

 

I see the confusion here. The diodes shown on the plan are only representative. Sadly, there is no symbol for a switchable diode so I had to improvise.

Drawing the full diagram by each break would be cluttered, especially when the plan is reproduced at a small size. However, I did provide the full details in caption 3 of the article, along with a photo of the switch fitted with a diode.

 

switchy.jpg
 

Question 2 - Does the SS1 actually swap the points over ? Or dose it need to have more diodes in it to have more than one train ?

 

The SS1 (The Shuttle control unit)  just makes the train go back and forth. Point switching is a seperate manual operation.
 
Only one train can operate at a time, to use 2, I'll leave one isolated in the platform and the other platform road and fiddle yard are effectively a single length of track .
 
Layoutview.jpg
Edited by Phil Parker
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Received issue one of the magazine and had a quick flip through, looks good from what I have seen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A couple of electronics questions.

 

This months article on wiring the Gaugemaster Shuttle system has seen a couple of questions come my way.

 

...The diodes shown on the plan are only representative. Sadly, there is no symbol for a switchable diode so I had to improvise.

 

Is this the sort of thing you had in mind?

 

 

 

post-7573-0-41456200-1442956932.jpg

 

 

I take it that you've also installed a "diode with track break" arrangement at the far ends of both track spurs (at the other end of the line).

 

In case anyone without an electronics background is wondering why I made the last comment, this basic arrangement is an "old school" method of ensuring that DC model railway locos stop moving before they reach the end of the track - a method which relies on the wiring convention set out in NMRA standard S-9. I can't remember the exact wording, but the basic message is as follows:

 

  • Locomotives shall be wired for 12V DC operation.
  • Direction change shall be provided by means of polarity reversal. A positive potential applied to the right hand rail shall produce forward motion.

 

Over the years, a number of companies have sold track wiring testers which rely on this convention to tell you if power is getting to a stretch of track on a layout. They generally use LEDs (with suitable series resistors) as the indicators. Usually, LEDs only conduct in one direction, lighting up in the process. LEDs don't like high reverse voltages - but this can be taken care of by fitting another LED, wired the opposite way round (which, rather helpfully, lights up instead when the "juice" gets reversed). In this way, it's possible to use the LEDs to show which way round the track is wired.

 

 

Returning to "Ruston Quays", I've got an electronics related question of my own - a question which might seem stupid, but isn't:

 

From various photos, I can see that the type number on the diodes starts with "1N400". What's the last digit of the type number?

 

 

The 1N4001 - 1N4007 series are 1A rectifier diodes. The last digit of the type number is a coded reference to the reverse voltage they're rated as being able to deal with - good practice calling for some safety margin over and above the currents and voltages which these components are likely to encounter.

 

Since I believe Gaugemaster sell these diodes as being suitable for this job (and I'm sure they'd play safe), I was curious just how much of a safety margin they'd allowed for.

 

 

 

While I think of it, do you ever find trains a bit "slow out of the blocks" when the "shuttle unit" reverses the "juice"? My reason for asking this is that, like with all semiconductor devices, there is a significant voltage drop across diodes when they conduct. If trains also stop a bit suddenly when they reach the end of the line, I suspect that it might be possible to use this as the basis for a refinement to the wiring, which might cause trains to slow down a bit before stopping.

 

I'd prefer not to go into detail right now - mainly because I'd wish to do a bit of experimenting first - but I think it should be possible.

 

 

Anyway, that's more than enough from me for now.

 

Huw.

Edited by Huw Griffiths

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using this method of auto shuttle for many years. used on models from OO up to G gauge. I had some timer units from another supplier, but over the years some have failed, but the Gaugemaster one has performed perfectly. I am not certain but Gaugemaster sell two different packs and I have the one for bigger trains. I had assumed it was probably just different diodes, but there might also be some slight difference in the unit. As I have used shuttle on many layouts, I have diodes from various model railway suppliers. Pity I did not read this before show yesterday as I could have asked one of the people at the exhibition I was at, as he supplies varios electronic bits including diodes and some DCC stuff.

I do have some DCC fitted locos, which run happily on analogue, as most USA models do. Anyway when running one of these on shuttle, there is a slow build up to power set when locos start, but stops I think are still fairly abrupt, more dependant on momentum. Thus you can have a more realistic start up with chipped locos running on analogue.

Main problem I have had is when wheels on short locos stop on same place, I have found after a while pick up is not as good and sometimes trains do not start. Part of the fault might be dirty pickups, as shuttle locos tend to run for longer periods on my layouts. I do use a graphite stick(carpenter's pencil) to improve pickup, as most of my trains are short and a little bit of slip is not a problem.

 

 

As some of my locos are old LIma, they do not tend to stop abruptly, and as they warm up the stopping distance can increase, so if I as building a new layout I might to tempted to put in diodes every inch or so, so stopping point can be changed, and also different locos(in particular DMU/EMUs) can be used. One thing I tend to make sure of, is use decent toggle switches(Gaugemaster) as I have heard of problems using cheap slider switches. If I need a lot, I might also consider making my own using chocolate block connectors as they are cheap and I probably will not need to reset them during an exhibition. Luckily I have a big bag of toggle switches so will use those.

 

One thing I have just remembered. The current Hornby trainset controller, not only doesn't have a 16v output, but seems to have a modification which allows power to build up rather than reversing immediately. A common problem of 'trainset' locos played with by children is worn out gears caused by rapid reversal of power to motor, especially at high speed. I am not sure if other manufacturers have done anything similar, but it might be useful for a shuttle operation.

Edited by rue_d_etropal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've now devised a version with an even smaller scenic fixed section of Edgeworth concept.

 

post-20065-0-01293900-1443564686.jpg

 

Julie

Edited by Steam_Julie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some reason I've got Ruston Quays and Edgeworth mixed up. My last posting should have read "I've now devised a version with an even smaller scenic fixed section of Ruston Queys concept.

 

Julie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good article about build a viaduct with business under it's arch. This is a topic not often covered in the magazines. Nice touch the name panel A York Pest Controller!

 

Julie

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Julie. I've seen a lot of businesses under arches, my local MOT place and the guy who fixes my car afterwards. The names are a bit of fun, just need a mini Andy to stand outside.

 

Don't worry about the name confusion either. We called it Edgewood 2 for a long while. In fact the directory I save the files into on my PC still has the name...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ruston Quays is off to Peter borough this weekend. I've been working hard to make it look something approaching finished, but there's still a long way to go.

 

Biggest job has to built a lighting rig. A couple of sheets of MDF, lengths of plywood and two Homebase spotlight units will now see 150 watts of illumination thrown on the scene. Needless to say, I've not quite got as far as painting this but at least you should be able to see the model and next month, we might even overcome the gloom of the NEC!

 

Technology has been a bit of a problem for me. The plan to be DCC'd fell through when I found that the chips I had been given and the sockets in the locos were different sizes. I'll be picking people's brains about the best chips for a Bachmann 03, Heljan 05 and Electrotren 0-6-0 steam tank. In the meantime, a 1980s DC controller will allow the yard to be operated.

 

RQRamps.jpg

 

Our electric uncoupling system hasn't done to well either. Yesterday I made a quick trip down the local model shop to buy some Peco uncoupling ramps (4, which was handy when I filled one with superglue) which do the job but look pug ugly. The electrical version looked better but seemed to suffer from interferance issues causing 1 unit to go haywire and another to break in the up position. Talking to friends, servo based systems can have problems in this area, not something I've noticed in model boats so presumably it's the electronics?

 

RQBothy.jpg

 

With most of the construction finished, I'm moving on to detailing. Static grass is being puffed from a bottle to represent weedy growth and fiddly plastic bits are being made up from packets. A box of HO scale details was bought at Scaleforum to add a lot of this but I'll be perusing the trade to add more bits and bobs.

 

If you are heading to the show over the weekend, please drop by and say hello.

Edited by Phil Parker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's that loco?

 

BUDCloco.jpg

 

One of the most popular questions asked last weekend was, "What's that nice industrial loco?".

 

I'd posed our only steam engine in the middle of the layout as it's more interesting than an 03 or 05 diesel, the other  motive power to hand. Since we weren't running the yard, it's compromised operational status (I broke a wire while fiddling trying to fit a DCC chip, another job for the list!) didn't matter and the layout looks better with a loco visible. 

 

The answer is, it's an ARC Models Barclay kit. A full build will appear in the January issue of BRM but basically, it's a loco kit that anyone could assemble. The resin body sits on top of an Electrotren 0-6-0 chassis. Construction is simple, the hardest job being adding the handrails. The RTR chassis ensures you end up with working model too as long as I've not been fiddling with it.

 

The next question, of course, is, "What does BUDC stand for?". I'll answer that in the article...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very much enjoying the series Phil. The track plan is similar to my own layout and have to say it is great fun to operate so hope you enjoy playing with Ruston Quays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seen the DVD with Decembers magazine. Good article on Ruston Quay. Enjoyed your section on brickwork too. Have I missed how you constructed the large warehouse disguising the dmu shuttle ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seen the DVD with Decembers magazine. Good article on Ruston Quay. Enjoyed your section on brickwork too. Have I missed how you constructed the large warehouse disguising the dmu shuttle ?

 

It's in last month's issue (November 2015). Basically, Skytrex parts supported by a wooden box.

 

big building.jpg

 

There's more on painting bricks in that issue too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, if I want this layout to run for Warley, I need to sort out this DCC malarkey.

 

To date, all my layouts have been controlled using proper DC via a Gaugemaster hand held controller. Personally, I've always been very happy with this but I'm told it's the 21st century so I must move with the times.

 

The current issue of BRM has a piece by Ben paying a visit to Digitrains so it's there I headed for advice.

 

The current stock list is:

  • Bachamann 03
  • Heljan 05
  • Electrotren chassis

The advice received was to buy 36-558A 6 Pin back EMF chips. Ordered lunchtime yesterday, 2 arrived this morning, all they had in stock.

 

Anyway, this is what the chip looks like. I'll dig out my test track, fire up the Dynamis and let you know how I get on.

 

DCC Chip.jpg

Edited by Phil Parker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil 

I've been really enjoying watching Rushton Quays come together especially on the dvd. That chimney is fantastic i really like it & it certainly captures a northern town. I grew up in a mill town & i was until recently surrounded by them although they had fallen silent. 

I've been building kits for the brm/ rmweb loco challenge i think i am currently on my tenth & they need a home. I think a version of Rushton Quays might be the solution although with a changed trackplan. Manchester has always interested me with its claustrophobic feel & Victorian architecture which i think would be a perfect home for my pre grouping models especially the LNWR kits i have winging there way to me.

Very inspirational layout i must say. Hopefully a EM version will appear before long :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really liked the bit on the DVD showing the making of foam stones for the canal edging. I'll use that method on my G scale indoor layout where the scenery has to be light weight and cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil 

 

I've been really enjoying watching Rushton Quays come together especially on the dvd. That chimney is fantastic i really like it & it certainly captures a northern town. I grew up in a mill town & i was until recently surrounded by them although they had fallen silent. 

 

I've been building kits for the brm/ rmweb loco challenge i think i am currently on my tenth & they need a home. I think a version of Rushton Quays might be the solution although with a changed trackplan. Manchester has always interested me with its claustrophobic feel & Victorian architecture which i think would be a perfect home for my pre grouping models especially the LNWR kits i have winging there way to me.

 

Very inspirational layout i must say. Hopefully a EM version will appear before long :)

 

That's what we love to hear. Anything we can do to get people modelling!

 

Please post progress on the layout - it's always great to see what people are up to.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really liked the bit on the DVD showing the making of foam stones for the canal edging. I'll use that method on my G scale indoor layout where the scenery has to be light weight and cheap.

 

I'll admit I was surprised how well this worked - I knew it would be fine but it went better than expected.

 

For more inspiration, Iain Robinson is the master at this sort of thing - check out his blog: http://iainrobinsonmodels.blogspot.co.uk/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope this is useful, sorry if some links have already been published Phil!

 

Bantam Tugs & Grafton Patent Boom Grab Dredger.

 

The Bantam Tugs were "invented" by E.C. Jones, boatbuilders of Brentford, where the Grand Union Canal meeets the Tidal Thames.

The unusual feature of the Bantams was that they were mainly designed to push rather than tow, though they can do that as well.

To that end, most were fitted with a winch on each side towards the bow, and two uprights to form a "Slot" on the bow. The boat to be pushed in trials was a conventional boat with a stem-post and a rudder, and was pushed backwards, On purpose built mud-hoppers, etc.,there was a "rib" for a stem post, that would engage in a "slot" in the Tug.

The cables from the winches were used to pull the boat to be pushed tightly against the tug, so forming, in effect, a single long powered boat.

In practice on the canals, the winches were often not used, so that the tug-and-tow combination was more flexible, to negotiate the sharp corners found on the canals. Also, it made hitching up and casting off much quicker, especally when shunting mud hoppers! A good dredging team was an amazing sight to see!

The Bantam Tug featured in the BRM article..
http://www.canalmuseum.org.uk/collection/bantam-tug.htm

There is a large Bantam Tug "MSC BANTAM II", at the National Waterways Museum at Ellesmere Port.
This tug was actually used to tow barges. Mainly from Hulme Lock to Trafford Park. 100 ton "Mere Boats", Barges named "something-mere", such as "Bigmere", also at the NWM, Ellesmere Port, were loaded with grain in Manchester Docks (River Irwell section of the Manchester Shio Canal), and worked to Kelloggs factory at Trafford Park.

From a seeming now deleted NWM page on the internet...
 

 

Bantam II, an all-welded steel tug, was laid down on 26 August 1951 at E C Jones Ltd., Brentford. She was built initially as a launch type tug, no. 20 in the Bantam series. Ostensibly she was built for stock but she could have been a cancelled order*. She lay at Brentford for four years when she was inspected by Manchester Ship Canal Company (MSCCo) engineers. After some uncertainty, she was modified to MSCCo’s requirements and delivered to Castlefields in 1956 at a cost of £2,929 16s 0d.

Technical Information

    Length: 26 ft 6 ins
    Width: 9 ft
    Engine: 30hp Lister JP3 engine, 1200 rpm built in 1955 at Dursley in Gloucestershire.
    Year of original construction: built 1951-52.  Cost £2,930.
    Builders name:  E C Jones of Brentford, no 20. For whom built: Bridgewater Department of the Manchester Ship Canal Company (possibly second owner)

Bantam II's story

Bantam II, an all-welded steel tug, was laid down on 26 August 1951 at E C Jones Ltd., Brentford.  She was built initially as a launch type tug, no. 20 in the Bantam series. Ostensibly she was built for stock but she could have been a cancelled order*. She lay at Brentford for four years when she was inspected by Manchester Ship Canal Company (MSCCo) engineers. After some uncertainty, she was modified to MSCCo’s requirements and delivered to Castlefields in 1956 at a cost of £2,929 16s 0d.

*Alternatively she may have been unsuccessfully trialled on gravel pits between 1951-5. As this type of push tug was a major innovation, to encourage sales E C Jones initially offered the tugs on a ‘sale or return’ basis. Other reports suggest that, during this early period of her life, she was used to tow the Kelloggs’ barges but this version is contrary to that of a steerer who worked on this run.

However, in 1956, to meet MSCCo’s requirements the front portholes on Bantam II’s wheel house were opened out to let more light into the cabin. Other fittings included a mast which was fitted to the cabin roof and was pivoted so it could be lowered to go through bridge holes and a full set of navigation lights.

Powered by a Lister JP3M 30hp engine, she represents a significant changeover in the 1950s from pre-war steam craft to the first of the more mass-produced diesel engine craft.

Bantam II was assigned to the Chief Engineer’s Department and was used as a run-about and for towing work boats, particularly dredgers. She used to work alongside Dredger GD101. The spoils were dumped in narrow boats and Bantam II would tow these away and return with them empty.  Sometimes she would also tow the dredger as, although it moved under its own propulsion, it wasn’t very fast.

Occasionally, she would join Bantam I as a ‘stop-gap’ tug on the grain barge run from Hulme Locks to Kelloggs at Trafford Park. The Bantam tugs were only used for a short while until the power barges arrived. At that time, it was common to see the small Bantam tug towing three 80 - 82 ton grain barges (like Bigmere) at a time along the Bridgewater Canal to Kelloggs’ factory at Trafford Park.

Bantam II never operated in her designed ‘push-tow’ role.  Plans for her to operate on the Ship Canal, and across the Mersey to Liverpool, did not materialise either.  These were vetoed by the Manchester Ship Canal Company’s Harbourmaster, citing lack of freeboard. Bantam II therefore spent her service operating from Castlefield Basin, where she was eventually laid up in in 1976 with gearbox failure, for which parts could not be obtained. She was returned to service for a short period, but required a major overhaul.  A new engine was bought but never fitted.

Bantam II was purchased by the Boat Museum in 1983 for £500.

Acknowledgement to Jim Shead’s article in Waterways World, September 2002, ‘Bantam is No Spring Chicken’
 

Bantam Tugs..
http://jim-shead.com/waterways/mwp.php?wpage=Bantam-Tugs.html




The Langley Models Grab Dredger seems to be based on a pattern used on the Grand Union Canal. One of these, once used on the Basingstoke Canal restoration, is now at the NWM at Ellesmere Port.

Originally No. 14 in the Grand Union Canal fleet, it was named "Perseverance" by the Surrey and Hampshire Canal Society.

The grab dredger No. 14 was built to an 1875 design and consists of a central hull and two side pontoons, for stability.
The Central hull is 70 feet long, and 7 feet in beam.
Each side pontoon is 70 feet long by  3 Foot 6 inches beam, so that the pair, when secured together, are 7 foot in beam.
This is so that the dredger and pontoons can be worked through a Narrow Canal Lock and bridges,
In use, the two pontoons are secred each side of the central hull.

The Langley model has the 3 pieces as one resin moulding.

She was built for the Grand Union Canal Company in 1934 by J. Pollock, Son & Co. Ltd. at Faversham, with a 70 foot hull, and the crane and patent grab was supplied  by Grafton of Bedford. She was used by the Grand Union Canal Carrying Co Ltd (as their Dredger No.14)  before being passed to the British Waterways Board. On construction and equipping she cost £2451.

 

She was then owned by the Kennet & Avon Canal Trust 1967-1974 and subsequently by Surrey and Hampshire Canal Society until 1993, before being acquired by the Boat Museum in 1995.

Key dates

    1934    Built by J. Pollock, Son & Company of Faversham to an 1875 design for the Grand Union Canal Company
    1934-1937    Used by Morethe Grand Union Canal Carrying Co Ltd (as their Dredger No.14) to dredge the Basingstoke Canal
    1947    Transferred to the British Transport Commission on waterways nationalisation
    1947-1967    Worked on the Shropshire Union Canal
    1967    Transferred to the Kennet & Avon Canal Trust
    1974    Acquired by the Surrey and Hampshire Canal Society
    1995    Acquired by the Boat Museum, Ellesmere Port


Photo on the Basingstoke Canal.
http://www.steamboat.org.uk/user.php?id=61567


Photos of the dredger in pieces at the Museum.
http://www.nationalhistoricships.org.uk/register/52/perseverance


Video of bantam Tugs, Mud Hoppers, and Grab Dredger No. 14, Perseverence, 1993 on the Basingstoke Canal.
 

 

Published on 6 Sep 2013

This video shows dredging operations going on on the Basingstoke Canal in Fleet in early 1993, right at the end of the restoration period. Bantam tugs can be seen pulling mud barges to the dredging site (near Pondtail bridge), and the Perseverance dredger filling them. The barges are then taken to Crookham Deeps to be emptied. Some good close-ups of the tugs, and particularly of Perseverance itself.

https://youtu.be/i4GYAxaeT4k

 

The Patent Boom system locates the grab making precision dredging possible. Other dredgers with a grab hung from a cable have the problem of positioning the grab, which will swing about! This problem exists with Grab Dredger 101, a Preistman crane body on a hopper barge, also at the NWM. Ex Bridgwater Canal departtment of the Manchester Ship Canal Company.

 

Another "deleted" page...all the Boat Info Pages seem to have gone from the NWM site!

 

 


 

Dredger GD101

 

Dredger GD101, launched in 1954, is a welded steel, motor grab dredger built for the Manchester Ship Canal Company for use on the Bridgewater Canal. She has a punted bow and stem with abrupt angular plate shaping consistent with a craft built to a restricted budget.

22591.jpg
 
Dredger GD101
 
Technical Information
  • Length: 48ft.
  • Width: 14ft 5ins.
  • Capacity: She has a hopper capacity of 715 cubic feet, with a carrying capacity of 1.25 tonnes.
  • Engine: W H Dorman & Co. Ltd., Stafford: 4DS, no. 57288, 4 cylinder 4 stroke compression ignition engine, 90mm diameter cylinders, 120 mm stroke, 27bhp at 1200 rpm.  Clutch and chain drive to crane mechanisms.
  • Crane: Priestman Wolf Mk III, fitted with 26 ft channel jib and rigged for grab use with ¾ cubic yard bucket. 
  • Year of original construction: Launched (by crane) 13 February 1954.  Cost £9,102.
  • Builders name:  W. J. Yarwoods of Northwich, yard no. 892.
  • For whom built: Manchester Ship Canal Company (Bridgewater Department).
Dredger GD101's story

The bed of the canal has to be kept clear by dredging out the soil and rubbish. This can most economically be done from the bank by using a drag line dredger but, where this is not possible, e.g. under bridges, in cuttings and where buildings intervene, a waterborne power-operated grab is used.

GD101 is unusual as she is self-contained. She has a small hoppered hold forward of the crane plus the grab equipment (most grab dredgers are a dredger alone and the spoil is loaded into other hoppered barges for removal). With GD101’s arrangement, localised spot dredging could be carried out without the need for a fleet of craft.

Another unusual feature of GD101 was that the Priestman crane’s engine was multi-functional and also drove the boat.

However, according to a report by Mr Deakin, a former skipper of the Manchester Ship Canal Company’s Bantam tugs, Bantam II was purchased in 1956 specially for the Dredging Department.  Silt dredged up by GD101 was loaded onto narrow boats and the Bantam tug would tow these away. The tug would also tow the dredger around from time to time as she was not very fast.

There is a cabin at the front of the craft which is the full width of the boat. This layout, and the fact the cabin was unlined, was consistent with a cabin for day use only and not for full-time accommodation.

GD101 was donated by the Manchester Ship Canal Company to the Boat Museum, Ellesmere Port in 1983. Since then GD101 has been restored to working order and is occasionally demonstrated.

Last date edited: 30 July 2015

 

Edited by Sarahagain
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably when the bricks have been coloured using the paint and crayon method, that you can then stick the compounents together using traditional poly cement, without the colours running?

 

Julie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably when the bricks have been coloured using the paint and crayon method, that you can then stick the compounents together using traditional poly cement, without the colours running?

 

Julie

 

No paint is safe from liquid plastic solvent (Meh Pak or similar) although if I'm careful, I can usually get away with it. The mortar paint will craze and lift slightly but if you are careful, it will dry again.

 

If using plastic cement from a tube, the problem is reduced as it doesn't run around so much.

 

I prefer to assemble the model and paint the bricks later where I can. Drainpipes and other details can be stuck on afterwards but you need to unse the minimum amount of glue and don't move them around much once glued. That way the paint softens and then hardens without disturbance. Sometimes superglue is a better bet than plastic glue for detailing as this doesn't affect paint or pencil colour.

 

Finally, a dose of weathering powder covers a multitude of sins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's that loco?

 

attachicon.gifBUDCloco.jpg

 

One of the most popular questions asked last weekend was, "What's that nice industrial loco?".

 

I'd posed our only steam engine in the middle of the layout as it's more interesting than an 03 or 05 diesel, the other  motive power to hand. Since we weren't running the yard, it's compromised operational status (I broke a wire while fiddling trying to fit a DCC chip, another job for the list!) didn't matter and the layout looks better with a loco visible. 

 

The answer is, it's an ARC Models Barclay kit. A full build will appear in the January issue of BRM but basically, it's a loco kit that anyone could assemble. The resin body sits on top of an Electrotren 0-6-0 chassis. Construction is simple, the hardest job being adding the handrails. The RTR chassis ensures you end up with working model too as long as I've not been fiddling with it.

 

The next question, of course, is, "What does BUDC stand for?". I'll answer that in the article...

A minor correction to your post Phil. The loco pictured is not a Barclay, the ARC model pictured is based on an 18" RSH side tank with certain proportions modified to produce a shorter body length to fit on the electrotren chassis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, yes, RSH. It's in the article, I must have had Barclays on the brain when I wrote the post. Probably arguing with my bank...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite interesting following this thread, especially as me and my father are currently in the process of building our first layout. Lovely work, and I look forward to more updates!

 

It's a shame to hear about the electronic uncouplers. Do you think there's any way to prevent the interference issue? As we have bought one a while ago to put into our layout, so of course are a little concerned after reading of your experiences and if we can, would like to prevent it going haywire.

 

Thanks,

Stuart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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