Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Already discussed that one somewhere else, which is what led me to finding out how horses really move. Apparently they don't have four feet off the ground all the time :). And their backs and heads move too.

I am aware of four diffrent modes of a horse moving Walk, Trot, Canter and Gallop only the last two have a period when no legs are on the ground

 

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am aware of four diffrent modes of a horse moving Walk, Trot, Canter and Gallop only the last two have a period when no legs are on the ground

 

Don

 

In Trot, also, there are moments of suspension, i.e. when all four feet are off the ground.

 

The Trot is a 2-beat gait, so, two feet on the ground together in diagonal e.g. outside fore and inside hind, followed by moment of suspension, followed by the 2 feet of the other diagonal, followed by moment of suspension and so forth.

 

In the Canter, a 3-beat gait, the outside hind goes down (beat 1), followed by the inside hind and outside fore together (beat 2), and then, finally, the inside fore does down (beat 3) and, as the horse leans forward there is a brief moment of suspension as it comes off the inside fore.

 

In the Gallop, a 4-beat gait, it is hind, hind, fore, fore (on the diagonal, so the first fore to go down is the opposite side to the last hind, e.g. outside hind, inside hind, outside fore, inside fore), followed by the moment of suspension. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry this is a rather large file, but I think it shows the complexity well:
 

post-7091-0-51147100-1483697584.gif

 

 

This is a simplified version I did, with the legs removed, and just the basic upper body/head movements, that I think could be more practical to recreate:

 

post-7091-0-84783200-1479056957.gif

 

I woke up this morning with a vision of Mr Ed getting bored with life in a stable, and only having Wilbur to talk to, emigrating to the UK, and operating tours on a monorail, providing both motive power and commentary :). Far easier to model if only his top half is visible!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wasn't the first moving picture of a horse running?

 

Muybridge_race_horse_gallop.jpg

 

120px-Muybridge_race_horse_animated.gif

 

Brilliant post, as it shows all the transitions in the gallop, when legs go down but also as they come back up, but in essence:

 

2-4 suspension

5 outside hind down

7 inside hind down

9 outside fore down

13 inside fore down

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shameless advertising, but I wanted to offer first to people who would appreciate:

 

I just nabbed a good, clean copy of Chronicles of Boulton's Siding, the 1971 reprint, for £10 (in central London!) - anyone who wants it for what I paid, plus postage, please shout by PM.

 

Kevin

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shameless advertising, but I wanted to offer first to people who would appreciate:

 

I just nabbed a good, clean copy of Chronicles of Boulton's Siding, the 1971 reprint, for £10 (in central London!) - anyone who wants it for what I paid, plus postage, please shout by PM.

 

Kevin

 

I have SHOUTED!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing I encountered today was one of those Hornby Peckett locos - beautiful, but sooo very tiny! I genuinely find it easier to appreciate them in larger than life photos, a bit like looking at beetles, some of which I think are bigger than the locos.

 

My eyes definitely couldn't cope with 00 these days, let alone my old favourites 009 and H0e.

 

Talking of which, this would make seriously suitable motive power for the West Norfolk Water Company tramway, bringing coal to the pumping station ....... when planning permisssion is eventually granted. http://www.gaugemaster.com/item_details.asp?code=MTR2011&style=&strType=&Mcode=Minitrains+2011

 

K

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing I encountered today was one of those Hornby Peckett locos - beautiful, but sooo very tiny! I genuinely find it easier to appreciate them in large than life photos, a bit like looking at beetles, some of which I think are bigger than the locos.

 

My eyes definitely could cope with 00 these days, let alone my old favourites 009 and H0e.

 

Talking of which, this would make seriously suitable motive power for the West Norfolk Water Company tramway, bringing coal to th impinge station ....... when planning permisssion is eventually granted. http://www.gaugemaster.com/item_details.asp?code=MTR2011&style=&strType=&Mcode=Minitrains+2011

 

K

no something like this is far more suitable

 

post-1480-0-27505100-1483724941.jpg

 

Nick

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suitable for ....... what, precisely?

 

I hope to goodness it has clutches, otherwise that horse will get worn down to a capybara on the downhill bits.

 

K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shameless advertising, but I wanted to offer first to people who would appreciate:

 

I just nabbed a good, clean copy of Chronicles of Boulton's Siding, the 1971 reprint, for £10 (in central London!) - anyone who wants it for what I paid, plus postage, please shout by PM.

 

Kevin

I can also strongly recommend the Oakwood Press book "Boultons Sidings including Contractors Locomotives" by Mike Sharman - drawings for all the locos featured in 'The Chronicles', they are to 7mm but this shouldn't be too much of a problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't heard of that book or it would have been on my bookshelf years ago. Seems to be available at any price from about £14 upwards (considerably upwards).

But I fear it could be a major distraction - too many delightful little oddities crying out to be modelled.

Jonathan

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit worried about that poor dobbin, it's going to get totally discombobulated if it's looking one way and finds it's moving backwards when it starts walking forwards.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more OT than usual, but those horse films have made me realise that:

 

1) horses gallop almost exactly as a dog runs;

 

2) it is easier to get your head round what is happening, if you watch only the fore, then only the hind.

 

The fore is carrying most of the load, and providing relatively little propulsion, and the hind is nearly all propulsion, and very little load.

 

Thank you BGJ for further education.

 

This should interest anyone who wants to build a 1/76 scale animated greyhound or cheetah https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jc8Hno4M0Qs

 

K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more OT than usual, but those horse films have made me realise that:

 

1) horses gallop almost exactly as a dog runs;

 

2) it is easier to get your head round what is happening, if you watch only the fore, then only the hind.

 

The fore is carrying most of the load, and providing relatively little propulsion, and the hind is nearly all propulsion, and very little load.

 

Thank you BGJ for further education.

 

This should interest anyone who wants to build a 1/76 scale animated greyhound or cheetah https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jc8Hno4M0Qs

 

K

 

Indeed.

 

Dogs, like horses, are rear wheel drive.  Quadrupeds tend to move in the same way; growing up in the countryside I remember being mildly surprised the first time I saw cows canter, but then realised, well, of course, they would.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P8f9-Q4NwA

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more OT than usual, but those horse films have made me realise that:

 

1) horses gallop almost exactly as a dog runs;

 

2) it is easier to get your head round what is happening, if you watch only the fore, then only the hind.

 

The fore is carrying most of the load, and providing relatively little propulsion, and the hind is nearly all propulsion, and very little load.

 

Thank you BGJ for further education.

 

This should interest anyone who wants to build a 1/76 scale animated greyhound or cheetah https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jc8Hno4M0Qs

 

K

I know horses gallop when hauling stagecoaches, especially when being chased by irate natives annoyed by palefaces invading their land (in films anyway), but as far as I'm aware, horse worked railways and trams were operated at walking pace!

 

I think the animated GIF I posted is especially useful, as it's easy to pick out a few frames that show stages of the movement. I'm thinking it may be possible to model the top of a horse in some flexible material, with some sort of mechanics to match to these frames, then hopefully get a smooth movement between these steps. If/when I try this, I think the first stage would be a road vehicle behind a hedge or wall. working legs would be a long way off.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have only just picked up on this excellent thread and its evocative village. The use of the building papers and scene setting is very reminiscent of John Ahern's work: to me, one of the highlights at Pendon. You would get on well with my friend Matthew Wald, a legal eagle in deepest Cornwall, who has made many of the buildings on Copenhagen Fields and also has horses to keep him poor.

 

One comment, if I may; to give the village a sense of 'place' and geographical orientation, should the roofs have some moss on them?

 

Tim

Edited by CF MRC
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BGJ

 

I wasn't suggesting that a gallop would be suitable for a railway horse. Anyway, good luck!

 

Getting back to iron steeds, the other book that I picked up yesterday contains a couple of interesting Norfolk snippets:

 

- a suggestion that Dodman built a second 'Gazelle', for use on the siding owned by the WN Farmers Manure Association, and there is a similar, but slightly different suggestion here http://hfstephens-museum.org.uk/light-railway-viewpoints/that-tight-little-light-little-train/23-topics/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35:gazelle&catid=23&Itemid=133. We might have talked about this before here, but blowed if I can remember ..... this thread needs a concordance!; and,

 

- purchase by the Lynn & Fakenham of surplus locos from the Cornwall Mineral Railway, who ordered far too many of a design of 0-6-0T, that was designed to operate cab-to-cab as a sort of cod Fairlie, see below. The L&F converted theirs to 2-4-0 tender engines, and one went to the CV&H in Essex too.

 

Dating is perfect for the WNR to have secured one or two, new and unused.

 

K

post-26817-0-65915000-1483792633_thumb.jpg

post-26817-0-29772800-1483793438_thumb.jpg

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting back to iron steeds, the other book that I picked up yesterday contains a couple of interesting Norfolk snippets:

 

- a suggestion that Dodman built a second 'Gazelle', for use on the siding owned by the WN Farmers Manure Association, and there is a similar, but slightly different suggestion here http://hfstephens-museum.org.uk/light-railway-viewpoints/that-tight-little-light-little-train/23-topics/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35:gazelle&catid=23&Itemid=133. We might have talked about this before here, but blowed if I can remember ..... this thread needs a concordance!; and,

 

- purchase by the Lynn & Fakenham of surplus locos from the Cornwall Mineral Railway, who ordered far too many of a design of 0-6-0T, that was designed to operate cab-to-cab as a sort of cod Fairlie, see below. The L&F converted theirs to 2-4-0 tender engines, and one went to the CV&H in Essex too.

 

Dating is perfect for the WNR to have secured one or two, new and unused.

 

K

 

You are, indeed, spot on as usual, Kevin.

 

This has certainly crossed my mind.  And I see that you have edited to include the 2-4-0 rebuild.

 

Why not both?

 

The GWR kept Nos. 1-9.  The CMR disposals were as follows:

 

CMR No.10, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2358, to Colne Valley & Halstead Railway 1880, Haverhill, sold to South Hetton Colliery in 1889 (this is where the GY&SLR Fox Walker went in 1900- see below), withdrawn 1948.

 

CMR No.11, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2360 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1881, as No.11, supplied with tender, withdrawn 1899.

 

CMR No.12, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2361 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1881, as No.12, supplied with tender, withdrawn 1902.

 

CMR No.13, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2368 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1881, as No.13, supplied with tender, rebuilt to 2-4-0 in 1891-2, withdrawn 1898.

 

CMR No.14, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2369 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1881, as No.14, supplied with tender, rebuilt to 2-4-0 in 1891-2, withdrawn 1897.

 

CMR No.15, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2370 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1880, as No. 3 Blakeney, rebuilt to 2-4-0 in 1891-2, withdrawn 1899.

 

CMR No.16, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2371 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1880, as No.2 Reepham, withdrawn 1894.

 

CMR No.17, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2372 of 1874, to Lynn & Fakenham Railway, 1880, as No.1 Melton Constable, withdrawn 1898.

 

CMR No.18, Sharp Stewart Works No. 2373 of 1874, to Lynn &  Fakenham Railway, 1881, as No.18, supplied with tender, rebuilt to 2-4-0 in 1890, withdrawn 1895.

 

There is thus already a double justification.

 

The first is to reflect what other small local companies bought as motive power.  The Lynn & Fakenham Railway is certainly local, and was a constituent of the Eastern & Midlands Railway (1882), later M&GN (1893).   I have planned to nod in this direction with the Fox Walker 0-6-0ST.  2 served on another M&GN constituent, the Great Yarmouth & Stalham Light Railway.  One was sold to a Durham colliery in 1900.  I can either imagine that, instead, she went to the WNR, or that the WN bought an example new in the 1870s.

 

The second is the fact that, like the Colne Valley, the WNR is GE-backed, and, so, there are similarities in motive power between the two lines.  Like the Colne Valley, it is to have a Johnsonesque T7ish 0-4-2T, and, indeed, a 2-4-2T.  So, it fits well for the WN to have an ex-CMR type on its WNR books.

 

These little CMR outside cylinder 0-6-0 tanks had 3’6” wheels (later 3’7½”) at 5’ and 6’ centres.

 

This makes the Electrotren/Golden Valley HO 0-6-0T/ST an almost perfect match (picture below from the Golden Valley Hobbies website).  So, when I next have a spare £59 ….

 

Those converted to 2-4-0s would make for a far harder project.  The coupled wheels were 4’7”,  the original leading wheels were retained, and presumably the wheels were at the same 5’ and 6’ centres.

So, one can imagine that the GW disposed of more than 9, or, that, on withdrawal one or more went from the E&MR to the WNR.  In such a case, the WNR might have the option of 0-6-0T, 0-6-0T plus 4-wheel tender, or 2-4-0 plus 4-wheel tender.

post-25673-0-20384300-1483798632.jpg

post-25673-0-68865200-1483798642_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-89927600-1483798647.jpg

post-25673-0-21569700-1483798657_thumb.jpg

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For an 0-6-0 the chassis will be a breeze - albeit a pricey-ish one as basically the same design was used on the GWR 1361 class.  I don't know anything about the construction of the Heljan version but the Kernow one should leave enough rough room to get the motor in the best place  (it might be a bit too high - a possible problem, thus far I've only had a rough look at getting it to fit the saddle tank rebuilt version of the CMR engines).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For an 0-6-0 the chassis will be a breeze - albeit a pricey-ish one as basically the same design was used on the GWR 1361 class.  I don't know anything about the construction of the Heljan version but the Kernow one should leave enough rough room to get the motor in the best place  (it might be a bit too high - a possible problem, thus far I've only had a rough look at getting it to fit the saddle tank rebuilt version of the CMR engines).

 

That is worth bearing in mind, thanks.

 

I reckoned that the Electrotren was a decent fit for a little Fox Walker.  The width of the motor, which extends forward to round the central axle, will require some blanking, as with the "TVR" saddle tank version, which is not ideal, but until I start the build, I won't know how much of a problem this might be.  

 

It is also a great fit for the CMR 0-6-0T.  The wheels are 14mm and 20mm and 24.4mm centres, or thereabouts. The most I should need to pay for one is £59 for a new Golden Valley option.  With patience, I ought to find one for no more than £50.   The 1361 options will, as you say, be pricey at around twice the price.

 

The chassis is thus ideal in terms of wheel base and wheel size, and the side tanks should come just far enough forward to contain the motor.  I have not checked for height, but as the Electrotren is a side tank, and to HO, I don't anticipate the boiler being at a significantly higher pitch than the CMR tanks, so the motor should not be too high. 

 

I cannot see it would be worth while paying twice the money to use a Heljan or Kernow 1361 class as a donor chassis for the ex-CMR locos as side tanks.  I can see how it would be a better bet for the GW saddle-tank rebuilds, simply because of where the motor is placed.

 

Now the Electrotren chassis is not such a good match for the Fox Walker.  The FW has 3'7" drivers, which is fine, but the centres are  equal and shorter, at 4'10".  This is why I have assumed that the West Norfolk Fox Walker is not the ex-GY&SLR example, anymore than the O-4-2T is CV&HR No.1.  Rather, it is assumed the WNR's FW is one supplied new in the 1870s.  I have seen FWs with longer wheelbases and ones with unequal distances between the wheels, so, though I have not seen one that matches the Electrotren chassis, I suggest that the proprietary chassis offers a wheel size and wheelbase measurement that is not impossible for FW of the 1870s.

 

The GW 1361 has 3'8" wheels, with the same spacings of 5' and 6' as the CMR tanks.  In this regard, it does not offer any dimensional advantages over the Electrotren in terms of producing a Fox Walker saddle tank, though the motor may be a better fit as it is a saddle tank model.  

 

Though the angle of the 1361's cylinders might be a better match than the Electrotren's for the CMR tanks, it is unclear whether the motor of either 1361 model would fit inside a CMR loco in its side tank condition.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know they ran them in hermaphrodite rig ..... excellently unlikely!

 

K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know they ran them in hermaphrodite rig ..... excellently unlikely!

 

K

 

In the my mind's eye, where my models are (a) finished and (b) look like the real thing, I can picture one of the side tanks with 4-wheel tender on CA's little TT.  

 

I understand that Lynn & Fakenham livery was green with black and white lining and brown frames (similar to the contemporary livery of the rival Great Eastern).  By 1886 the E&MR livery was chocolate brown (Jenkins, The Lynn & Hunstanton Railway (Oakwood), Page 45), and Ronald Clark says Melton painted them brown with yellow and black lining.  I believe this to be like the LB&SCR Marsh small passenger lining of black edged yellow.

 

So, I wonder whether No. 11 or 13, for instance, is in L&F green, but with E&M initials, or, if they are in E&M brown. I note that the double lining on these two has incurves (like e.g. LB&SCR lining), unlike the lining on the 2-4-0 rebuilds. 

post-25673-0-59396500-1483809173_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-05267400-1483809186_thumb.jpg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is worth bearing in mind, thanks.

 

I reckoned that the Electrotren was a decent fit for a little Fox Walker.  The width of the motor, which extends forward to round the central axle, will require some blanking, as with the "TVR" saddle tank version, which is not ideal, but until I start the build, I won't know how much of a problem this might be.  

 

It is also a great fit for the CMR 0-6-0T.  The wheels are 14mm and 20mm and 24.4mm centres, or thereabouts. The most I should need to pay for one is £59 for a new Golden Valley option.  With patience, I ought to find one for no more than £50.   The 1361 options will, as you say, be pricey at around twice the price.

 

The chassis is thus ideal in terms of wheel base and wheel size, and the side tanks should come just far enough forward to contain the motor.  I have not checked for height, but as the Electrotren is a side tank, and to HO, I don't anticipate the boiler being at a significantly higher pitch than the CMR tanks, so the motor should not be too high. 

 

I cannot see it would be worth while paying twice the money to use a Heljan or Kernow 1361 class as a donor chassis for the ex-CMR locos as side tanks.  I can see how it would be a better bet for the GW saddle-tank rebuilds, simply because of where the motor is placed.

 

Now the Electrotren chassis is not such a good match for the Fox Walker.  The FW has 3'7" drivers, which is fine, but the centres are  equal and shorter, at 4'10".  This is why I have assumed that the West Norfolk Fox Walker is not the ex-GY&SLR example, anymore than the O-4-2T is CV&HR No.1.  Rather, it is assumed the WNR's FW is one supplied new in the 1870s.  I have seen FWs with longer wheelbases and ones with unequal distances between the wheels, so, though I have not seen one that matches the Electrotren chassis, I suggest that the proprietary chassis offers a wheel size and wheelbase measurement that is not impossible for FW of the 1870s.

 

The GW 1361 has 3'8" wheels, with the same spacings of 5' and 6' as the CMR tanks.  In this regard, it does not offer any dimensional advantages over the Electrotren in terms of producing a Fox Walker saddle tank, though the motor may be a better fit as it is a saddle tank model.  

 

Though the angle of the 1361's cylinders might be a better match than the Electrotren's for the CMR tanks, it is unclear whether the motor of either 1361 model would fit inside a CMR loco in its side tank condition.

I seem to remember reading that the Electrotren chassis wheels didn't like fine scale track though I have no first hand knowledge so might be worth checking, I'm sure someone on here will know. Will it work on Peco track, what about C&L and SMP?

 

Martyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BGJ

 

...

 

Getting back to iron steeds, the other book that I picked up yesterday contains a couple of interesting Norfolk snippets:

 

- a suggestion that Dodman built a second 'Gazelle', for use on the siding owned by the WN Farmers Manure Association, and there is a similar, but slightly different suggestion here http://hfstephens-museum.org.uk/light-railway-viewpoints/that-tight-little-light-little-train/23-topics/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35:gazelle&catid=23&Itemid=133. We might have talked about this before here, but blowed if I can remember ..... this thread needs a concordance!; and,

 

 

K

The second "Gazelle" is a nice idea, but I wasn't convinced it had actually happened when I researched the original article.  No reason why one shouldn't put in an appearance at Castle Aching, of course (apart from the difficulty of actually making it work...)

 

Happy New Year to one and all,

 

Tom

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.