Building kits for Tyneside in the BR era. J24 and PDK D49/2

[rowanj]

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/2359-dlts-sr-locos-e1r-class-by-sef-revisited/[/url]

 

All the best,

Dave.

It was your thread which gave me the idea, Dave. I had some phosphor bronze strip, from a dead Hornby chassis, so have got the Bottomscratchers, basically just inverted Backscratchers, fitted to the leading pair. They aren't as springy as I would like so the wire idea may well be a better bet. Normal Backscratchers will work on the centre and rear wheels so it looks like I'm still on track.

[mikemeg]

 

I know I've made a couple of errors assembling the brakes, and as a consequence, lost a bit of detail. On TW's thread recently, there has been a bit of discussion about poorly made models being thrown away, etc and folk giving up. I couldn't disagree more, Even with the errors, I'm confident that I'll finish up with a decent working loco, and that my next one will be better, As long as I continue to enjoy the exercise , I'll keep going

 

It isn't TW that you have to satisfy; it is your good self. And we have all had to learn this kitbuilding and learn it by doing it. Your final sentence, above, says it very succinctly.

 

Regards

 

Mike

Edited January 29, 2016 by mikemeg

[rowanj]

Digital photos plus primer are great for pointing out where more work is needed. But overall I think t's showing promise. I'm still waiting for the High Level Gearbox and motor, and at that stage I should be able to check where the Backscratcher pickups will fit Other than that, the rest of the work is mainly tidying up before the final primer and Halfords Satin black.

[rowanj]

Still not got the parts to complete the chassis, but Highlevel Gearboxes have such a good reputation that I'd be amazed if I can't get it running. One issue I did find was that the couplimg rods fouled the brake shoes. This may be because I'm building in 00, or perhaps I just made a mistake. However some judicious filing seems to have given me the clearance I need, albeit at the cost of some detail.

 

The next and last post will be the completed, weathered version  I'll add a few notes about my overall experience and, specifically, where I had problems. However I can assure anyone thinking of taking on a kit from Arthur that they will finish up with a working loco having thoroughly enjoyed building it in the process.

 

 

[rowanj]

To conclude this thread, some photos of the J77 and a few observations. There is a bit still to do - the loco needs some coal and more tidying up of the weathering. I've also replaced the front lamp iron to prevent it appearing 10 minutes before the rest of the locomotive.. It also needs couplings , which I think will need to just a bar across the buffers as I don't see an obvious way to fit tension locks.

 

This is my second etched kit, and to be honest I'm enjoying this aspect of the hobby more than the operational side, though it's always nice to see them working. The ArthurK/North Eastern Models have a great reputation, and I think it is well deserved. Arthur recommended this as a "beginners" kit and I'm not unhappy with how it turned out. More to the point, constructing it was a real pleasure.

 

The instructions are generally very clear, and are much more comprehensive than were the PDK B16. My advice for beginners is to follow them religiously. I sometimes forgot that I was a beginner and missed a stage, Usually, it was easily corrected, but caused unnecessary tension. The kit, particularly the chassis, is very detailed with lots of small parts and it was easy to break a previously soldered joint trying to repair or install a missed piece.

 

A couple of points, however, which need bearing in mind.

 

Because of the number of detailed parts, I wasn't sufficiently knowledgeable about the detail of how locos work to always understand where things went. Because, by definition, these kits are of relatively obscure types, photos were often hard to come by, for example of the cab layout. I wanted to incorporate as much of the detail as possible even if it wouldn't be seen in practice, so this was sometimes awkward and I had to revert to "best guess"

 

The chassis was a lovely set of etches but, modelling in 00, was always a tight fit, Pickups were always a problem, particularly on the centre drivers, and I eventually had to do without one spring on the "live" side. I may see if I can re-instate it in due course. EM modellers will no doubt find this easy and use plungers without batting an eyelid.

 

I couldn't get away with Gibson wheels. I don't know why but they derailed ad nauseum, I resorted to Markits 16mm and they look ok, if not as prototypical as Gibsons. It also meant I could use Romford crankpins which I found much simpler than Gibsons.. I imagine much of this is down to a combination of inexperience and incompetence.

 

I made a real dogs breakfast of fitting the brakes, despite trying, but obviously failing, to follow the instructions.They are handed and I think I just got muddled. Old age? Once fitted, I found they were so far out of the chassis that they would foul the coupling rods. I'll know next time. Judicious filing got everything sorted up to a point, but a lot of lovely detail was lost in the attempt.

 

As I was waiting for motor and gearbox to be delivered, I spotted a couple of posts about cheap - and I mean cheap - Mitsumi motors. I took a punt at 5 for £2.73 and fitted 1 via a Markits gearbox just to see how it went, intending to replace it when the Mashima/High Level combo arrived. Incredibly, it works beautifully - smooth and quiet. My locos don't do serious mileage, so I've just left it in for now. The motor fixed into the gearbox with a couple of self-tapping screws, and take 1.5mm gears. They come with a worm attached which I Dremeled away.

 

So to conclude...

 

There are lots of really talented modellers who show their work and several have been extremely kind and helpful as I mangled these kits. Arthur Kimber is a particular pleasure to deal with, and if he is not too horrified at what I've done to his kit, I'll be back for more It is important to do the best one can and strive to improve, but I think there is often a danger in seeing nothing but the faults in what one builds, particularly when set against the work of experts or RTR. Surely it is better to have a go and finish up with something which, while perhaps not approaching professional standards, is certainly usable and passes the "three-foot rule". Especially if you enjoyed making it.

 

Bring on the PDK B16/3

 

John

 

I

Edited February 14, 2016 by rowanj

[Kenton]

 

It is important to do the best one can and strive to improve, but I think there is often a danger in seeing nothing but the faults in what one builds, particularly when set against the work of experts or RTR. Surely it is better to have a go and finish up with something which, while perhaps not approaching professional standards, is certainly usable and passes the "three-foot rule". Especially if you enjoyed making it.

 

Excellent builds. Take my word for it you get better with each kit, though there are some kits that defy even the "professionals". There is also a big temptation to believe (not helped by what you generally see on RMWeb) that adding more and more detail is what every modeller wants/needs to do. There are plenty of folk out there who just want a working model of something that looks close to the prototype and built solidly and true. They are happy with the 3ft rule and don't inspect their models with a magnifying glass. Then there are the rivet counters who need everything and more including the invisible. Both have their place but sometimes the pursuit of the unobtainable becomes obsessive.

 

The most important thing is to build it the way you want to and to keep pushing and more the skill set until it reaches your own standards/objectives.

 

 

Keep enjoying it and let the rest of us enjoy watching the progress.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Kenton

[rowanj]

Though practice has not yet made perfect, at least it's brought an improvement. The NER tender will be towed by either a B16/2 or /3 - yet to be decided. The kit, obviously, is PDK. The tender soldering is largely completed and is posed behind the B16 to check height and be subsequently towed around the layout to check running. I see several blobby bits where the fibre glass pencil will come into play. Hey ho.

[rowanj]

There is little point in posting a whole host of photos when there is already an excellent post by Mike Edge showing a much superior build of the very similar B16/2. Mine will be the Thompson version - B16/3.. However, I hope to show that an acceptable effort can be made by the novice that is me - this is only my 3rd attempt at an etched kit.

 

The chassis was a very easy build. The brakes are very tight against the insulated wheel rims, but a bit of judicious tweaking left them shorting free. I used a 1426 Mashima in a Comet gearbox, as I had the set to hand, so needed to remove a small amount of metal from the rear of the boiler where the joint is made. It's invisible in the flesh.

 

Photos of the prototype show the front tender handrails were lengthened above the top handrail knob to match the height of the loco cab,an interesting piece of Thompson symmetry given the look of his Pacifics.

 

I had trouble with the leading bogie in my B16 and resorted to a Hornby spare, I think from an A4, which has the same wheelbase as the PDK etch, and this worked well so I used to the same for this model. After a lot of faffing about with springs and adjustment of slots, I found that a bolt through the hole in the bogie into a bolt soldered directly above worked perfectly, even on my track work ! There Is a bit more room on the B16/3 than the B16, so Gibson wheels will be fitted when they arrive. I'll post a photo later.

 

The valve gear is that supplied in the kit. See Mike Edge's post for a more accurate version. The crossheads were pretty ordinary castings and needed a fair bit of filing to remove extraneous flash. The same was necessary to the brass chimney and whitemetal dome.

Edited November 15, 2016 by rowanj

[Michael Edge]

We still have plenty of these etches, one of the main reasons for doing them was the difficulty of working with oversize cast crossheads and the usual silly way of representing the three bar arrangement with two vertical ones.

[rowanj]

.I mentioned that I was busy with my third etched kit, and here it is - a PDK B16/3. Digital photos have to be cruel and unusual punishment to a modeller, but they do have the advantage of pointing out where tweaks can still improve matters. Some further work will take place before Halfords Satin Black is applied, then Modelmaster lining and decals.

Edited November 30, 2016 by rowanj

[robert17649]

To conclude this thread, some photos of the J77 and a few observations. There is a bit still to do - the loco needs some coal and more tidying up of the weathering. I've also replaced the front lamp iron to prevent it appearing 10 minutes before the rest of the locomotive.. It also needs couplings , which I think will need to just a bar across the buffers as I don't see an obvious way to fit tension locks.

 

This is my second etched kit, and to be honest I'm enjoying this aspect of the hobby more than the operational side, though it's always nice to see them working. The ArthurK/North Eastern Models have a great reputation, and I think it is well deserved. Arthur recommended this as a "beginners" kit and I'm not unhappy with how it turned out. More to the point, constructing it was a real pleasure.

 

The instructions are generally very clear, and are much more comprehensive than were the PDK B16. My advice for beginners is to follow them religiously. I sometimes forgot that I was a beginner and missed a stage, Usually, it was easily corrected, but caused unnecessary tension. The kit, particularly the chassis, is very detailed with lots of small parts and it was easy to break a previously soldered joint trying to repair or install a missed piece.

 

A couple of points, however, which need bearing in mind.

 

Because of the number of detailed parts, I wasn't sufficiently knowledgeable about the detail of how locos work to always understand where things went. Because, by definition, these kits are of relatively obscure types, photos were often hard to come by, for example of the cab layout. I wanted to incorporate as much of the detail as possible even if it wouldn't be seen in practice, so this was sometimes awkward and I had to revert to "best guess"

 

The chassis was a lovely set of etches but, modelling in 00, was always a tight fit, Pickups were always a problem, particularly on the centre drivers, and I eventually had to do without one spring on the "live" side. I may see if I can re-instate it in due course. EM modellers will no doubt find this easy and use plungers without batting an eyelid.

 

I couldn't get away with Gibson wheels. I don't know why but they derailed ad nauseum, I resorted to Markits 16mm and they look ok, if not as prototypical as Gibsons. It also meant I could use Romford crankpins which I found much simpler than Gibsons.. I imagine much of this is down to a combination of inexperience and incompetence.

 

I made a real dogs breakfast of fitting the brakes, despite trying, but obviously failing, to follow the instructions.They are handed and I think I just got muddled. Old age? Once fitted, I found they were so far out of the chassis that they would foul the coupling rods. I'll know next time. Judicious filing got everything sorted up to a point, but a lot of lovely detail was lost in the attempt.

 

As I was waiting for motor and gearbox to be delivered, I spotted a couple of posts about cheap - and I mean cheap - Mitsumi motors. I took a punt at 5 for £2.73 and fitted 1 via a Markits gearbox just to see how it went, intending to replace it when the Mashima/High Level combo arrived. Incredibly, it works beautifully - smooth and quiet. My locos don't do serious mileage, so I've just left it in for now. The motor fixed into the gearbox with a couple of self-tapping screws, and take 1.5mm gears. They come with a worm attached which I Dremeled away.

 

So to conclude...

 

There are lots of really talented modellers who show their work and several have been extremely kind and helpful as I mangled these kits. Arthur Kimber is a particular pleasure to deal with, and if he is not too horrified at what I've done to his kit, I'll be back for more It is important to do the best one can and strive to improve, but I think there is often a danger in seeing nothing but the faults in what one builds, particularly when set against the work of experts or RTR. Surely it is better to have a go and finish up with something which, while perhaps not approaching professional standards, is certainly usable and passes the "three-foot rule". Especially if you enjoyed making it.

 

Bring on the PDK B16/3

 

John

 

I

could not agree more its incredibly rewarding putting something together off your own bat then putting it on the track and watching it trundle even if it takes an absolute age!

[lanchester]

Though practice has not yet made perfect, at least it's brought an improvement. The NER tender will be towed by either a B16/2 or /3 - yet to be decided. The kit, obviously, is PDK. The tender soldering is largely completed and is posed behind the B16 to check height and be subsequently towed around the layout to check running. I see several blobby bits where the fibre glass pencil will come into play. Hey ho.

Unless this is just to check the locomotive-tender coupling/drawbar functionality, I'm not quite sure why you are 'checking height' of the tender versus locomotive - this will vary quite a lot depending on how much coal and water the tender is carrying, so I would guess that having the essentially cosmetic valances, running boards etc actually in line would be more unusual than some mismatch - an emptyish tender would ride much higher on the springs.  And even assuming the tender was designed for the locomotive. When swaps occurred and as railways became more cash-strapped, you wouldn't necessarily make these cosmetic alterations. Somewhere in the RCTS Green Books there is a list of the work done to transfer self-trimming 4125 gall tenders from Q6 to the Atlantics - and it turned out to be a lot more than might be thought. Later transfers: works probably wouldn't bother.

 

Those nice 'works grey' portrait shots with everything lining up probably represent both boiler and tender unloaded.

 

I think I am saying that, for a real 24 carat rivet counter, the relative height of loco and tender needs to relate to the represented load of coal, and the (imputed) water still carried. Or have I just driven some of our esteemed members and colleagues into a new form of madness!

[rowanj]

Unless this is just to check the locomotive-tender coupling/drawbar functionality, I'm not quite sure why you are 'checking height' of the tender versus locomotive - this will vary quite a lot depending on how much coal and water the tender is carrying, so I would guess that having the essentially cosmetic valances, running boards etc actually in line would be more unusual than some mismatch - an emptyish tender would ride much higher on the springs.  And even assuming the tender was designed for the locomotive. When swaps occurred and as railways became more cash-strapped, you wouldn't necessarily make these cosmetic alterations. Somewhere in the RCTS Green Books there is a list of the work done to transfer self-trimming 4125 gall tenders from Q6 to the Atlantics - and it turned out to be a lot more than might be thought. Later transfers: works probably wouldn't bother.

 

Those nice 'works grey' portrait shots with everything lining up probably represent both boiler and tender unloaded.

 

I think I am saying that, for a real 24 carat rivet counter, the relative height of loco and tender needs to relate to the represented load of coal, and the (imputed) water still carried. Or have I just driven some of our esteemed members and colleagues into a new form of madness!

 

That's a great post - really enjoyed it. I think the "norm" in kit building is to try to get loco and tender reasonably level, all things being equal. I was just trying to follow best practice, as this was how the kit was designed. However its gratifying to know that any irregularities will be by design, and not an accident.!!

 

Talking of rivet counters, I've added Archers rivet transfers to the smokebox top, which are quite prominent on the real thing, and also on the footplate just behind the curve ahead of the buffer beam. Whether they survive the black spray remains to be seen.

Edited November 30, 2016 by rowanj

[rowanj]

All things being equal, I like to add a bit of extra pipework to my locos, and the picture of 61464 from 1959 showas a couple of piperuns on the LH firebox by the cab. I dont have a photo of the other side of this loco so am leaving it clear, although other members of the class have a similar conduit leaving the cab on the firemans side. The photo shows what I've done.

 

I have also shown the rivets on the firebox, which are quite clear on many photos. For these, I used Archers rivet transfers, which are very easy to use. I got mine directly from the US, ordering a sheet with a variety of spacing until I was clear what I needed . They came very quickly, and though not cheap, will be suitable for several models. As can be seen, the carrier film is visible, as I put the rivets directly onto the matt etch primer. I trust it will tone down when I apply weathering.

Edited December 3, 2016 by rowanj

[rowanj]

Here is the B16/3, and the original B16/1. I doubt anyone with even moderate ability would have any real problem with these. Space is tight under the frames dor the bogie, and some work was needed to clear the cylinders. I had access to a decent range of photos, so could add a bit of pipework and misc conduit, on the basis that, if I could see it on the photo, I would have a go at even some slight resemblance on the model.

 

Santa is bringing me a Crafrsman C12, so that's next.

 

John

[rowanj]

For something different, I'm in the process of building a Graeme King J6. I have his permission to post these photos, but need to stress that Graeme produces these and other excellent castings as a hobby. You will need to contact him diirectly to check availability. i thoroughly recommend his work on the LNER Forum where he posts as Atlantic 3279.

 

These are all resin castings, including the chassis. Almost all the parts needed can be supplied for loco and tender. I only needed to provide a whistle, and a snifting valve which I damaged through pure carelessness. A sub-chassis for the tender can also be supplied. As usual with kits, motor, wheels and handrails need to be purchased separately by the builder.

 

The first  photos show the resin chassis, then my almost completed version. Graeme uses a system of gearing with a Cheap Japanese motor matched to plastic gears. I had the motors -£6 for 5, on Ebay? - but not the gears. So mine runs through a single stage Markits gearbox. This needed some resin removed from the chassis, and the chassis "hollowed " where the gearbox fits. I was a bit apprehensive about how strong the chassis would be but all went well. I found a drill in the Dremel used as a sort of file against the chassis sides gave the quickest result - there is a fair bit to remove - finished off with a small flat file.

 

The footplate needed no work, but resin needed to be removed from the front of the firebox and rear of the boiler underside to clear the motor, and a small piece was removed from the centre of the cab to clear the gearbox. the photos show this.

 

The resin chassis is marked to show the location of the wheels, which were drilled out and bearings fitted. ​ ​I had a set of J6 coupling rods in the spares box, origin unknown, and, although they needed opened out rather more than I would have wished, the chassis runs very sweetly.

 

[rowanj]

The rest of the loco and tender assembly was straightforward. The fit of parts was almost perfect. I used Hafixs superglue, on the back of a recommendation, and it's great stuff, but it grabs really quickly on resin to resin. I used all Graeme's parts, though I probably would use metal buffers on the next one. The steampipe is wire used for flower arranging, and was obtained in a pack of 20 x 18" lengths for £3 from a hobby superstore which has conveniently opened nearby. This will provide more than enough for all the locos I'm likely to build. I also use it for the "hook and goalpost" method

I typically use to connect loco and tender,

 

The photos show the loco under construction, then virtually complete, Wheels are 20mm Markits, slightly underscale, but I already had them, Being a resin chassis, both sets need pickups to complete the circuit, though I used uninsulated wheels on 1 side from my existing stock. I need to construct and fit balance weights, and  fit a dummy front coupling, then I'll weather it using dry brushing.

 

Being all resin, weight is an issue, I'm going to use self- adhesive 6mm lead strip as an experiment, when it arrives, There is plenty of room in the boiler and above the motor so all should be well.

 

I'll post a final couple of photos when all is complete,

[rowanj]

A great tip I was given by Mikemeg was to take digital photos and study them as they reveal what the naked eye - esp 67yo ones- has missed. In this case, amongst other things, was the tender wheels out of sync with the axleboxes. Graeme supplies one tender sub chassis but different versions of the GN tender and, for the J6, I needed to ignore the pre- marked centre wheel and drill a replacement to match the axleboxes, which are cast integrally with the tender frames. Being resin, this is the work of a few minutes.

 

[rowanj]

And here is the finished loco, bar the front coupling and crew, The idea is that it is work-stained but not unduly scruffy. It still needs the dummy coupling and crew, but is otherwise complete. A nice, easy way to a J6.

 

Now for the Craftsman C12....

[rowanj]

Not a very exciting photo, but it shows the start of a conversion of Graeme's J6 kit to a J2. Because I had a damaged footplate, which in any event needs modifying for the J2, and a spare resin chassis, I just decided to have a go and see how I get on.

 

There are enough similarities between the classes to make the conversion reasonably simple and enough visual differences to make it worth the effort. The J2 cabsheets are longer, spectacle plates a different shape, the boiler is pitched slightly higher, as well as other details. I don't have a drawing, and so will be working from such limited photos as I can find, unless some kind soul can help. I believe there were kits in the past...

 

The other difference is the wheel diameter, which is 5'8". I'm unsure if the wheelbase is the same as the J6, but as I'm using the J6 chassis, I'll just have to live with any error and hope it's not too visually evident.

 

The footplate needs to be shortened 2mm at the frond and extended the same at the rear. The photo shows the cuts, ready for repair. I also show the "virgin" chassis, This will need modifying to get the correct ride height with the larger wheels, but the resin cuts and files easily, and seems to keep its strength. I know this because the original I bought was cracked, and this is actually the replacement. However, as an experiment, I used superglue to repair the break and used it on the J6 and it has made a very strong joint, Superglue, incidentally, is the glue to use on Graeme's resin.

 

Wheels will be W&T 23mm, and motor a Highlevel  Compact+

 

 

[rowanj]

Progress on the J6 to J2 conversion has centred on getting the chassis/footplate looking satisfactory, before investing on the rest of the parts needed.

 

The photos show the modifications to the chassis block to enable the Highlevei Roadrunner Compact+ to fit. As can be seen in earlier photos, the chassis is well marked to show where the axle holes need to be opened. On fitting the wheels, the chassis was rock solid, all wheels revolved freely, but the centre pair were no touching the track. They do now that I deepened the hole and all seems well. Pity the photo didn't have all of them actually on the track !!

 

The footplate has been adjusted to add the extra 2mm at the rear at the expense of the front. I have also shown where white plasticard will represent the cosmetic changes needed for a J2. The loco was classed as "mixed traffic" by the GNR and has 5 ft 8 in. wheels. Graeme based his J2 on a Bachmann K3 chassis with undersized wheels. I split the difference and have W & T 22mm on Graeme's chassis. I was concerned that I might have problems with insufficient clearance at the splashers, but. although some resin needed scraping away, I seem to have got away with it, as the wheels revolve freely, and the loco height seems ok when posed with the J6 and other RTR stock. I'll see what it looks like when I get a boiler.

 

I'm not sure about the livery late in the class's life. A few lasted into 1954 and were still in use on local passenger services .I assumed plain black/early crest was the norm. but 1 photo I found shows a loco in fully lined black at Nottingham Vic in 1952. If anyone knows....

 

[rowanj]

The revised footplate is now complete, other than the usual filling and filing which a coat of primer and digital photography always seems to show. I decided I needed to adapt the splashers, as photos of the prototype made clear how much bigger they were than the J6. The valve guides seem to have got a bit "wonky" too. However, all that is cosmetic so should work out ok.

 

I used Gibson Universal coupling rods, for the first time, The wheels revolve without any tight spots but I haven't applied any motor power yet, I seem to have got away with quartering by eye, but one soldered joint may be a bit too weak. We shall see.

 

The last photo shows the J6 and J2 to try to illustrate the differences. Having said that, the only 3 photos of the class I can find show what could be 3 different classes of loco - different handrail arrangements, chimney, pipe runs. And I still only have 1 in BR days, annoyingly in fully-lined mixed traffic livery!

 

[manna]

G'day Gents

 

The J2's were a mixed traffic loco, so they had the full mixed traffic livery, I've included a picture. Good luck with the model.

 

manna

[rowanj]

Thanks for the excellent picture, which I will use as my template. This loco survived to Dec 1953, and looks ex-works in the photo. Some of the lining will be a challenge !!

 

Here are a couple of snaps of the amended cab. The spectacle plates and cab extension really change the look of the loco from the J6. I haven't quite got the spectacle plates right just yet.

 

As with the J6, I needed to remove the resin ahead of the firebox and a small piece under the boiler to fit the motor/gearbox and suspect a similar small cut will be needed on the cab floor, All these were sufficiently invisible on the J6 to not cause any issues.

 

John

Edited January 23, 2017 by rowanj

[2750Papyrus]

According to Yeadon, 65023, 65016 (photo) and 65020 were unlined black in 1948.  65015 was the first J2 to be lined in Sptemeber 1949 with no lettering or emblem on tender (as above).  65019 (photo), 65016, 65018 and 65020 were fully lined with small emblem in 1950.  65022 (photo) was ex-works in plain black without lining in June 1951 and was followed by 65017, 65023 and 65015. 

 

There is some variation between locos regarding retention of piston tail rod platforms and location of handrails and vacuum pipe.