'The Odiham Branch' a new project in 2mmFS

[nick_bastable]

- and yes I've still got to make and fix the axleboxes.  I think I'll give the burns a couple of days to recover!  The work still need cleaning up - but these are rather cruel enlargements of something not much longer than the top joint of the thumb!

I find it easier to glue the axle boxes on 

 

Nick

[Chris Higgs]

Surely a G6 is inappropriate for a layout like this, they were town yard shunters and didn't normally venture out on the road - which is why there were so few of them (and why, without travelling around the system, they were so difficult to "cop").

 

The last 10 "high cab" O2s were visually similar (but not quite identical) to the G6s from the running plate up and were (both passenger and freight) road locos for lines with low axle-load limits. But then, if you are worried about an 0-6-0 chassis, an 0-4-4 is ......................

 

...probably going to run fine as an 0-4-2-2T. As suggested (and implemented) by Tim Watson on his Midland 0-4-4T.

 

The O2 appears to have an extra 7" in bunker length.

 

Chris

[bécasse]

 

 

The O2 appears to have an extra 7" in bunker length.

 

 

 

Which is easily encompassed in 2FS by soldering in some 1mm square section brass when assembling the kit. If it is soldered in so that it is just proud it can be filed back to be all but invisible. It is a long while (like 50 years) since I last did a comparison in detail, but I think that there may be one or two other very minor differences but nothing that can't either be overcome or will be all but invisible in such a small scale.

[Mikkel]

Hi Ian, what a nice project, I especially like the buildings you've identified, very attractive.

 

Funny thing is, if I had seen the baseboard photos without text I would have guessed it was your work - you have a distinctive style. Maybe it's the Depron foam :-)

 

It must be so nice to be able to 'nip along and check things' - I'm a bit envious there   

[Donw]

Is the G6 to scale or distorted to fit a GF chassis? I suppose it would fit the Association 57xx chassis developed by Chris.

Don

[scanman]

Is the G6 to scale or distorted to fit a GF chassis? I suppose it would fit the Association 57xx chassis developed by Chris.

Don

Hi Don -

 

Chris has checked the overall dimensions (in his word 'I wont do a chasis for a model whiich isn't right') and it looks good.  The issue with the pannier chassis is that the wheelbase is wrong.  If you check out Chris Higg's thread on 'A Haynes Manual...' he is in fact 'modding' the pannier chassis to make the wheelbase correct - and as the G^ and 'O2' were virtually identical body-work wise he's going to do an 'O2' chassis as well!  I can take a little credit in suggesting the 'G6' mod to him...

[Chris Higgs]

Hi Don -

 

Chris has checked the overall dimensions (in his word 'I wont do a chasis for a model whiich isn't right') and it looks good.  The issue with the pannier chassis is that the wheelbase is wrong.  If you check out Chris Higg's thread on 'A Haynes Manual...' he is in fact 'modding' the pannier chassis to make the wheelbase correct - and as the G^ and 'O2' were virtually identical body-work wise he's going to do an 'O2' chassis as well!  I can take a little credit in suggesting the 'G6' mod to him...

 

Well, to describe it as modding the Pannier doesn't give quite the right impression. I'm designing the chassis from the GA I found of the G6, and it will have the double thickness frames I now use on my latest chassis designs. Because of the particular configuration of the G6, it will not have a two stage gear reduction, instead it will drive directly onto the rear axle using a 30:1 gearset and either the 7mm motor everyone has been buying on ebay, or at maximum an 8mm diameter coreless motor of the builder's choice. This will leave the cab totally free of motor. The O2 will drive on its rear coupled axle, but with the motor facing in the opposite direction.

 

The G6 body etch is pretty accurate, but the front splashers seem about 1mm too far forward. The builder can hack them to correct, or mount the chassis 1mm forward from where it should be and hope that nobody notices! It will be necessary in any case to hack the footplate inside the tanks, as its etched for the pannier wheelbase.

 

In the built photos on the N-Brass website, the boiler looks too high with too much daylight under it. I cannot quite pin down why, the etch for the smokebox is accurate. Perhaps the boiler has too small a diameter.

 

 

Chris

Edited January 16, 2017 by Chris Higgs

[Donw]

That's very interesting. I have a G6 etch but had put it to one side when I realised they were normally used for shunting at major depots. But a high cab O2 sounds much more likely to be seen out and about on lesser byways. The etched chassis will be a great help.

Don

[Ian Morgan]

I am looking forward to the O2 chassis - just what I need for Freshwater. Reg Dear gave me some bits for an O2 that he had intended to build in addition to those he had already built for his model of Ventnor (which is now in the museum at Haven Street), but I do not have a very good track record when it comes to making a chassis that works.

[nick_bastable]

 but I do not have a very good track record when it comes to making a chassis that works.

that makes two of us then  

 

Nick

[scanman]

Moving on...

 

The cattle wagon underframes are now complete -

 

 

The underside view with D1529 (l) and 1530 ®.  Spot the differences!

 

Easier from the side maybe?? -

 

 

So now theyre off for a wash & brush-up - a good scrub with fibreglas, followed by another with 'Barkeepers friend', then a warm soak in the ultrasonic bath.

 

Rather than paint them, I'm going to coat them with 'Carrs' 'Nickel Black' - hopefully the effect will be less thick than paint (and perhaps less liable to rubbing off).

 

An yes Nick, I glued the axleboxes into position!

 

Right, on with the 'Air Ministry' tankers...

Moving on...

 

The cattle wagon underframes are now complete -

[queensquare]

Well, to describe it as modding the Pannier doesn't give quite the right impression. I'm designing the chassis from the GA I found of the G6, and it will have the double thickness frames I now use on my latest chassis designs. Because of the particular configuration of the G6, it will not have a two stage gear reduction, instead it will drive directly onto the rear axle using a 30:1 gearset and either the 7mm motor everyone has been buying on ebay, or at maximum an 8mm diameter coreless motor of the builder's choice. This will leave the cab totally free of motor. The O2 will drive on its rear coupled axle, but with the motor facing in the opposite direction.

 

The G6 body etch is pretty accurate, but the front splashers seem about 1mm too far forward. The builder can hack them to correct, or mount the chassis 1mm forward from where it should be and hope that nobody notices! It will be necessary in any case to hack the footplate inside the tanks, as its etched for the pannier wheelbase.

 

In the built photos on the N-Brass website, the boiler looks too high with too much daylight under it. I cannot quite pin down why, the etch for the smokebox is accurate. Perhaps the boiler has too small a diameter.

 

 

Chris

 

For an 0-4-4T I would advise having the motor at the rear, as far back into the bunker as it will go. So long as it is below cab window level it will be all but invisible - particularly with a carved crew stuck to it. The reason is balancing the loco. The motor is comparatively light so is best sat over the trailing bogie allowing the space over the drivers to be stuffed with as much weight as possible.

 

Jerry

[Chris Higgs]

For an 0-4-4T I would advise having the motor at the rear, as far back into the bunker as it will go. So long as it is below cab window level it will be all but invisible - particularly with a carved crew stuck to it. The reason is balancing the loco. The motor is comparatively light so is best sat over the trailing bogie allowing the space over the drivers to be stuffed with as much weight as possible.

 

Jerry

 

The motor is already facing in that direction, and you can put it further back still by extending the shaft.  In this case I'm not that inclined to put a second stage of gearing into the design, as it won't add that much to the reduction ratio. The only thing obstructing the addition of weight over the drivers is the worm, and I don't think a spur gear on the axle instead would increase the amount you could add.

 

I have realised my M7 chassis design completely ignores your advice, and drives off the front axle. But a quick play with the CAD suggests using one of Ultrascale's 38:1 wormsets instead on the rear axle with no secondary chain will also work fine, and places the motor far enough back. Julia powered her GWR 14XX with the same combination.

 

Unfortunately the wheels on the O2 are not large enough to accomodate the 38:1 gears.

 

Chris

Edited January 19, 2017 by Chris Higgs

[2mm Andy]

I have realised my M7 chassis design completely ignores your advice, and drives off the front axle. But a quick play with the CAD suggests using one of Ultrascale's 38:1 wormsets instead on the rear axle with no secondary chain will also work fine, and places the motor far enough back. Julia powered her GWR 14XX with the same combination.

 

Not quite - Julia used the 38:1 wormgear on an intermediate shaft and squeezed in a further pair of spur gears to get something close to 80:1 reduction overall. Some details here;

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/220/entry-13314-fings-wot-i-ave-been-upto/

 

IIRC she filled the boiler with a tungsten cylinder (machined from a dart body) to get the weight over the driving wheels.

 

I think it would lift the motor too high for the 02 (unless you modelled one of the IoW examples fitted with the larger bunker).

 

Andy

[queensquare]

Not quite - Julia used the 38:1 wormgear on an intermediate shaft and squeezed in a further pair of spur gears to get something close to 80:1 reduction overall. Some details here;

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/220/entry-13314-fings-wot-i-ave-been-upto/

 

IIRC she filled the boiler with a tungsten cylinder (machined from a dart body) to get the weight over the driving wheels.

 

I think it would lift the motor too high for the 02 (unless you modelled one of the IoW examples fitted with the larger bunker).

 

Andy

I seem to remember this was the second chassis Julia put under the loco as I know she had real haulage problems with it. This also accounts for the tungsten slug in the boiler.

 

Jerry

[2mm Andy]

I seem to remember this was the second chassis Julia put under the loco as I know she had real haulage problems with it. This also accounts for the tungsten slug in the boiler.

 

Jerry

 

Julia doesn't post on here any more, but advises me that it is definitely the original chassis (based on one of Chris's test etches for the 14xx chassis now in Shop 3). The body has had a few modifications as you describe as the original wouldn't pull an autocoach.

 

Andy

[queensquare]

Julia doesn't post on here any more, but advises me that it is definitely the original chassis (based on one of Chris's test etches for the 14xx chassis now in Shop 3). The body has had a few modifications as you describe as the original wouldn't pull an autocoach.

 

Andy

Thanks Andy, apologies to Julia. I know we test ran it on TM at Swindon Steam one year and she said she had modified it and added extra weight. I incorrectly assumed it was a replacement chassis.

 

Jerry

[Donw]

I had a quick word with Gordon a retired Southern driver. He remembers them having a G6 or two at Basingstoke for shunting and has either fired or driven one. 

Don

[Chris Higgs]

Not quite - Julia used the 38:1 wormgear on an intermediate shaft and squeezed in a further pair of spur gears to get something close to 80:1 reduction overall. Some details here;

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/220/entry-13314-fings-wot-i-ave-been-upto/

 

IIRC she filled the boiler with a tungsten cylinder (machined from a dart body) to get the weight over the driving wheels.

 

I think it would lift the motor too high for the 02 (unless you modelled one of the IoW examples fitted with the larger bunker).

 

Andy

 

Depends what motor. Using the 7mm diameter ones that that are favour of the month, and perhaps inclining it back downwards at the rear it might go in. This would look decidedly odd but nothing mechanically wrong with it.

 

Chris

Edited January 19, 2017 by Chris Higgs

[scanman]

I had a quick word with Gordon a retired Southern driver. He remembers them having a G6 or two at Basingstoke for shunting and has either fired or driven one. 

Don

Ahh  -just down the road from 'Odiham' then!

 

Regards

 

Ian

[scanman]

Right - the 'Air Ministry' tankers.  Like the cattle wagons these are a 2mm Association kit - so you'll need to join  (http://www.2mm.org.uk)!  So whats in the box (or jiffy bag)

 

 

As can be seen, the chassis is in etched nickel-silver (and like the cattlewagons is a masterpiece in its own right)  End frames and tank detailing are in white metal, whilst the tank itself is a resin moulding.

 

SO FAR my construction method has followed the downloadable instruction sheets (4 of them with very good explanatory sketches for the detail).  Having opened up all the relevant brake rigging holes to 0.35mm (remember the cattle wagons??)  a start was made on the first chassis -

 

 

 

This shows the basic underframe where the sides and ends form a nice rigid box once bent up and soldered.  However I've got three of the little 'darlings'!  Even so, by the end of the evening I'd reached this point -

 

 

where the underframes and brake gear is basically finished - all thats left is to add an outer 'v-hanger' and the brake lever to each side.

 

Unlike the cattleqwagons, the brake gear is a standard 'push me-pull-you' rod type - not half as complicated as the last lot!

 

Right, I'm off to rest my weary eyes and pop the blisters!

 

[nick_bastable]

Right - the 'Air Ministry' tankers.  Like the cattle wagons these are a 2mm Association kit - so you'll need to join  (http://www.2mm.org.uk)!  So whats in the box (or jiffy bag)

 

AT-01 the kit.jpg

 

As can be seen, the chassis is in etched nickel-silver (and like the cattlewagons is a masterpiece in its own right)  End frames and tank detailing are in white metal, whilst the tank itself is a resin moulding.

 

SO FAR my construction method has followed the downloadable instruction sheets (4 of them with very good explanatory sketches for the detail).  Having opened up all the relevant brake rigging holes to 0.35mm (remember the cattle wagons??)  a start was made on the first chassis -

 

AT-02 the basic underframe.jpg

 

 

This shows the basic underframe where the sides and ends form a nice rigid box once bent up and soldered.  However I've got three of the little 'darlings'!  Even so, by the end of the evening I'd reached this point -

 

AT-03 Ducks in a row.jpg

 

where the underframes and brake gear is basically finished - all thats left is to add an outer 'v-hanger' and the brake lever to each side.

 

Unlike the cattleqwagons, the brake gear is a standard 'push me-pull-you' rod type - not half as complicated as the last lot!

 

Right, I'm off to rest my weary eyes and pop the blisters!

nice work I find it easier to add the wheel bearings while the etch is flat 

 

Gin is very good for blisters taken internally  

 

NIck

[iamjamie]

I am looking forward to the O2 chassis - just what I need for Freshwater. Reg Dear gave me some bits for an O2 that he had intended to build in addition to those he had already built for his model of Ventnor (which is now in the museum at Haven Street), but I do not have a very good track record when it comes to making a chassis that works.

 

Me too! I'll need an O2 for my Bembridge layout at some point!

[scanman]

nice work I find it easier to add the wheel bearings while the etch is flat 

 

Gin is very good for blisters taken internally  

 

NIck

Nick - I'm always loathe to do that in case it interferes with the folding process - although having aquired a 'Hold & Fold' those fears are receding!  They actually wern't too difficult - I think it took about 20 minutes to do all twelve.  The beauty of batch-building.  Hick, hick (that works too!)

[scanman]

Moving on to the upperworks...  The instructions require the modeller to drill 0.3mm holes in the 'splashplate to take the strapping.  I left this 'til later!  I did however CAREFULLY drill out the buffer locations in the pre-marked positions.

 

Next stage is to fix the end supports (whitemetal) to the baseframe  (whitemetal).  I actually used superglue for this - but a word of warning.  The end stanchions are VERY delicate!  I actually dismembered one whist cleaning it up (and I have to thank Steve Simms, the 'No2 Shopkeeper for a very speedy replacement).  However, I may have a solution - see the end-note.

 

 

The half-assembled base frame can now be attached to the etched running gear.

 

The next stage is to fit the 'splash-plates' over the 'anchor straps'.  I cleared the etched slot with a 0.35mm drill and the process went fairly well - then the anchorstraps have to be bent to 90 deg to lie flat on the splashplate.  At this point I used the pre-exisiting hole in the anchorstrap to drill the hole in the splashplate.  I very quickly learned that the torque associated with the process snapped the end of the anchorstrap!  These were then soldered down with 'Carrs Solder Paste' (no connection!).  The beauty of the paste is that any excess can be removed with a fibreglass brush after the process.

 

The drawback with this method is that things like pin-vices and fibreglass pens are working very close to those delicate stanchions!

 

 

Still, I got the job done, and the unit is now very nearly ready for a swim in 'nickel-black' - after visiting a certain stand at the Southampton Show tomorrow!).

 

Now a recommendation.  If I make any more of these little beauties, I will leave the end stanchions off until I've fixed the baseplate etc to the underframe.  This would also allow the option of making a much firmer soldered connection.  Right  -just the V-hangers  and brake levers to fix....

 

Regards

 

Ian