Q6

[R Marshall]

Early builds of the C7s had 4125 gallon tenders but were not self trimming. The later batches were attached to the 4125 gallon self trimming tenders the same as those fitted to the later Q6s, B16s and Q7s There were differences in some of these tenders notably the type of spring hangers used but all these self trimming type had essentially identical bodies except that the rails of the 1917 batch of Q6s were cut back at the end of the coal space. 

 

All these later tenders had the rails swept down at front and rear. The preserved Q6 is not fitted with one of these nor do I believe it to be self trimming none of the early 4125 gallon tenders were ever self trimming which is why those on the C7s were swapped with those from the Q6s. I believe 3395 to be attached to be the standard 3940 gallon, non self trimming style. It certainly was when it was initially bought for preservaton.

 

In short if it has straight ended coal rails ending at the rear of the tender it is not self trimming.

 

I never claimed that the tender behind 63344 was not self trimming, of course it is. The angle was change to six inch when moved to a C7. This angle was not changed back to three inch when it was subsequently put back behind a Q6.

 

ArthurK

 

Arthur,

 

I think we agree on many points, but look at the attached pictures of 1621 (with a 3940 gallon tender) and 63395 (with a tender that at least has the height of a 4125 gallon tender whatever the capacity). Pictures of 63395 both immediately before and immediately after preservation show a tender of comparable height and for a modeller it's the apparent size that's important.

 

Regards,

 

Roy

[ArthurK]

Arthur,

 

I think we agree on many points, but look at the attached pictures of 1621 (with a 3940 gallon tender) and 63395 (with a tender that at least has the height of a 4125 gallon tender whatever the capacity). Pictures of 63395 both immediately before and immediately after preservation show a tender of comparable height and for a modeller it's the apparent size that's important.

 

Regards,

 

Roy

Sorry to disagree but the tender behind 1621 is not of 3940 capacity. It did indeed have a tender of that capacity but it was removed to put behind a newly built J39. The tender currently behind 1621 has a capacity of 3038 gallons and does indeed have lower sides.  Note also that it does not have the outside compensated brake rods that 3940 tenders had. On 1621 the pull rods on the tender run behind the wheels and the adjusters can be clearly seen in your photo.

 

The heights of the side sheets were 3038 3' 9", 3940 4' 3" and 4125 (trimming and not self trimming) 4' 9".

 

ArthurK

[R Marshall]

Sorry to disagree but the tender behind 1621 is not of 3940 capacity. It did indeed have a tender of that capacity but it was removed to put behind a newly built J39. The tender currently behind 1621 has a capacity of 3038 gallons and does indeed have lower sides.  Note also that it does not have the outside compensated brake rods that 3940 tenders had. On 1621 the pull rods on the tender run behind the wheels and the adjusters can be clearly seen in your photo.

 

The heights of the side sheets were 3038 3' 9", 3940 4' 3" and 4125 (trimming and not self trimming) 4' 9".

 

ArthurK

Arthur,

 

Here's a 3038 gallon tender with 65033 - clearly much smaller than that currently with 1621.

 

I've made no study of tender brake rods, but oddly enough, 65033's tender has the outside rodding you describe for 3940 gallon varieties, as do the 3038 gallon tenders in figures 66 and 72 of RCTS Part 3C

 

For additional evidence compare figures 66 and 67 in RCTS Part 3C  showing both types of tender (3038 and 3940 gallon) with 1621.

 

Regards,

 

Roy

[ArthurK]

North Eastern Tenders are a minefield for modellers. I was wrong in one respect and, I quote from the green books "care was taken to remove the small 3038 gallon tender which has been put on in March 1941 and to replace it by one of the correct size from 1629". It also appears that the some at least of the tenders behind the D17s with 3940 gallon tenders did not have compensated outside pull rods. Perhaps  the tender from 1629 was one on these.  That makes another  variant for the 3940 tenders. Early 3038 tenders did not have the compensated brakes. That came in with the J26/27s. in later years tender swapping was the norm and virtually any version of the 3038 tenders could be found on the classes J21/24/25/26/26/27.

 

As far as I am aware all the 3940 gallon tenders had 'D' shaped cut-outs in the frames. Also I am not aware of any swapping of earlier tenders to Q6. I think that we can assume that all Q6s had the compensated brakes.

 

The cab windows were 3' 9" above the footplate so we can judge from that.

 

Of course a preserved tender is not necessarily at true measure of what was. Certainly the tender in your photo appears  in extremely good condition. Surely some one out there knows if the tank has been replaced.

 

ArthurK

[MatthewCarty]

Sorry for a diversion away from the very interesting tender discussion, but has anyone else had a problem with the Q6's connecting rod jamming against the crank pins of the second set of wheels? (The crank pin is fully screwed in)

[Porcy Mane]

 Surely some one out there knows if the tank has been replaced.

 

ArthurK

To quote Pete55 from this earlier post:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/105494-q6/page-19&do=findComment&comment=2374053

 

"The Q6 tender was the subject of a Manpower Services scheme in the mid to late 80's when NELPG had a base at ICI Wilton, when the chassis and running gear were fully overhauled and a new tank constructed."

 

​And as I said earlier in the thread: Looking at the current wide valance along the side of 63395's tender, the rebuilt body/tank currently appears to be of the narrower width whereas study of some of the many pics that were taken of 63395 just prior to withdrawal show that the tender body was of the wider construction (Narrow Valance) when withdrawn from BR service. 

I've posted this pic before. It's the rear view of 63395's tender. Again that which it was withdrawn with, taken in Aug 1967. It's clear to my eyes that the body is of the wider width. Ian Krauss and Colin Gifford photographed the same train a few minutes later from an elevated position on top of Usworth Colliery spoil heap and looking at Mr Krause's photograph it is again clear that 63395 tender at that time, had the wider body with the taller height.

Edited August 17, 2016 by Porcy Mane

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Sorry for a diversion away from the very interesting tender discussion, but has anyone else had a problem with the Q6's connecting rod jamming against the crank pins of the second set of wheels? (The crank pin is fully screwed in)

 This is nothing unique to this model, just the usual conflict of the large lateral axle movement needed to get OO models round grossly underscale set track curves. I very carefully inspect all outside cylinder models new to me as described below before operation, because it only needs one small incident of pressure applied to the outside gear, and fouling is a probability.

 

The cure is to ensure the connecting rod will always clear the crankpins, without fouling on any other moving or static component in its working space. View the model from the underside, check that the slide bars are parallel to chassis side: if these trend inwards at all, carefully adjust until parallel. If that is insufficient to always ensure clearance, then gently shape the connecting rod into a smooth curve which will always 'miss' the crankpins, but not foul on other fixed structure.

[DougN]

Back a heap of posts I mentioned that there were issues with the pick ups on my Q6 as received.... Well over the weekend last (yes I know it is Wednesday... I've been busy alright 8(  I have figured out that there is no pick up comming from the loco and it is solely using the pickups on the tender. Well yes it has been running very well but occasionally there is a stutter/ non movement on dcc control. therefore I will need to back track through the wiring in the loco and see where the pickups are not making contact. 

 

Um I don't think this is great quality control and maybe this loco should have gone back to Hornby as a poor quality issue. Doesn't really bother me to fix these things BUT I paid for a product and it only barely does what is says on the tin. OK, off my soap box and feeling better now...

 

This is the first poor quality offer that I have had from Hornby.... and knowing how poor their customer service is I will just fix it. 

 

Just thought that I would share the problem... once I get to the bottom of the problems I will post the solution. 

[Hilux5972]

How long have you had it? Did you get it direct from Hornby? If not the shop you got it from is responsible for sorting out any issues.

[DougN]

Hilux, the point is to send it back to the UK from Australia is a costly exercise as you are aware. To spend a little time to find the problem is slightly more efficient. Ok it is a bit of modelling time used up... But when I have been doing things like this they usually run very well!

[SRman]

If it is merely a broken or disconnected wire, it should be fairly easy to trace, using a process of elimination. I would start by checking the continuity through the four pin plug from loco to tender. Obviously, the connections feeding the brushes are working, so that only leaves two of those connections to check.

Even so, Doug's Q6 ran happily enough on my layout for several hours on Saturday. The sound was good but, as Doug said to me, it needs a tad more bass in it, so once he fixes the pickups, the next task will be to experiment with speaker setups.

Edited August 24, 2016 by SRman

[The Black Hat]

Which Sound Chip have you used for your Q6?

[DougN]

Hi Black Hat... back a page I discussed the sound chip, it is a You choos with a 28mm speaker. (ZIMO 645R) Problem is the chip size/ plug location/ sound enclosure/ combine and run out of room in the LNER version. I say this as the tenders are different between the 3 issued so far. the LNER has the sloping coal interior which takes further room from the space! 

[Porcy Mane]

I say this as the tenders are different between the 3 issued so far. the LNER has the sloping coal interior which takes further room from the space! 

I think that restriction will apply to the tenders of all three Q6 models Hornby currently have available.  3418(R3424) and 63433(R3425)  have the 4125 gallon self trimming tender with the two sides and rear of the coal space being inclined.

If for 63429(R3426) paired with the non self trimming tender, the rear of the coalspace should still be inclined if Hornby have modelled it as prototype, so you still have the same restriction.

 

P

[DougN]

Well I did manage to grab half an hour on Sunday, I pulled the loco apart. (watch the reversing rod it stops the body coming off) I cleaned a lot of the excess grease from the baseplate and checked the operation of the plungers to the pick ups.  I cleaned the contracts with IPA and I now have one side of the loco picking up all the way through. Still need to see what is going on with the other side again. But the loco is running slightly better!

 

BTW there is no need to pull the body off as you can access everything up need by removing the chassis base plate. Be aware that there is 4 screws that hold it on!

[JaymzHatstand]

The body surgery on mine is almost complete, the arrival of a North Eastern Kits dia. 50 dome and safety valve has enabled me to complete the boiler mods to backdate it to a proper LNER machine.

 

Using all the references I could find, the cab has been stripped of all post preservation items and also has the 'fish fryer' added. The numbers and lettering all came off with minimal effort with T-Cut so it's not far off the paint shop!

 

A couple of questions have arisen though, has anyone taken the lubricator drive off the right hand side, and is it as simple as unscrew and pull out of the chassis block? And would the upper half of the cab interior of a late 1920s LNER machine have cream coloured walls, or, as I've read suggested in various places a shade of red?

 

Cheers

 

J

[JaymzHatstand]

Details of my mods can be found here...

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/99152-jaymz-modelling-adventures/?p=2428550&do=findComment&comment=2428550

 

 

Cheers

 

J

[DougN]

I had my Bradwell build out next to the Hornby model today. I still think my build is just as good as the Hornby as did the others I was with. I must admit my build was of the earlier boiler so they are different.

[Lambton58]

Finally got round to getting the layout out and running my Q6.  Apart from a couple of minor snags it runs beautifully out of the box.  The snags are

1.  the sanding pipes were catching on the pointwork (Peco code 75).  As a temporary fix I've removed them pending tweaking or filing down.  They seem to be made from steel wire so are a pretty rebust.

2.  the centre wheel on the tender sticks a bit, so a little bit of fettling is needed.

 

As I said, apart from those items, it runs beautifully and looks great pulling an assortment of 21ton hoppers or steel flats.

 

Ralph

Lambton 58

 

PS the K1 got it's first run too (it's only taken me 18 months!!) ,,,,  lurrrrverly :-)    Hats off to Hornby, with the K1 and Q6 they have produced two superb models.

Edited September 24, 2016 by Lambton58

[JaymzHatstand]

As I mentioned earlier, my Q6 has been backdated to a pre-war LNER machine with D.50 boiler. As can be seen below, this is now complete and ready to be pressed into service, once I have a suitable set of wagons to hang behind the tender, even a nice LNER brake van would do for now!

 

 

 

More photos and details are available on my workbench thread

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/99152-jaymz-modelling-adventures/?p=2442854&do=findComment&comment=2442854

 

Thoughts and comments are always welcome!

 

Cheers

 

J

[R Marshall]

As I mentioned earlier, my Q6 has been backdated to a pre-war LNER machine with D.50 boiler. As can be seen below, this is now complete and ready to be pressed into service, once I have a suitable set of wagons to hang behind the tender, even a nice LNER brake van would do for now!

 

 

 

More photos and details are available on my workbench thread

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/99152-jaymz-modelling-adventures/?p=2442854&do=findComment&comment=2442854

 

Thoughts and comments are always welcome!

 

Cheers

 

J

Nice looking model - I like the profile of the original NER dome cover.

 

According to RCTS Part 6C, this locomotive received the tender from C7 2169 (continuous coal rails and oval frame slots) in October 1934, in exchange for its own original 4125 gallon self trimming tender (of the variety with coal rails "sawn off" at the back of the coal space). However, it's perfectly possible that it had a further tender change (to a 3940 gallon tender as modelled) in the period of your model.

 

Regards,

 

Roy

[JaymzHatstand]

Thanks Roy, the dome certainly does change the appearance considerably. As for the tender, when I first picked that loco from Yeadon, the photo I used looked like it had the 3940 with coal rails for a tender, so I paid it no more mind, concentrating on the loco details. Looking again, the holes in the frames are definitely oval! Ah well, I'll have to pretend that I don't know it's wrong now!

 

I suspect that in the future I will acquire another Q6, proably with the non-continuous coal rails, so there could easily be another swap if that occurs! Dear Santa...!

 

Cheers

 

J

[DougN]

Good news and bad news today. My Q6 started playing up yesterday the sound was not working and the loco was having an issue with movement.

 

So that is the bad news in that the loco failed outright, but living as I do here in Australia some times it is better to investigate rather than go to Hornby. I took the chip out and reinstalled to prove that the chip had no issues... in doing so I found that one of the resisters marked R1 was incredibly hot and as it is only 3mm long and a surface mounted. Having struck a resistor previously causing problems in that the loco progressively slows as the resistance rises as the temperature increases. So as I had the soldering iron on (as I am slowly building a Martin Finney V2) I took the resister off and inserted a piece of wire to replace it. Now the loco is back to running well and the sound is ok.

 

So one of things I will check on all new Hornby loco's is the resisters on the plug base!

 

I am still playing around with the sound install in the Q6 to try and improve the sound output.

[micklner]

Just acquired a early BR version which I want to backdate to LNER days. Can anyone confirm if the Smokebox Door is a separate moulding please, before I start carving the number off on the door. ?.

[Porcy Mane]

Can anyone confirm if the Smokebox Door is a separate moulding please, 

 It is. Slight push from behind saw it pop off, complete with surround. There's a key way at 6 o clock.