Churminster & Stowe Magna, Southern Railway

[Bluebell Model Railway]

Hi Tony, 

 

 Its mentioned on the 3d print groups on RMWEB but it's something you learn through expirence, and knowledge of that model. 

 For example your locomotive probably should of been printed on its end or at an angle, due to its boiler which may have removed some of the flatter faces which make up a circle. 

I probably would of removed the chimney and dome and printed them separately, to improve quality. 

 I have 2 printers of my own and I've had to change the model positioning twice to get a good print but now I've found where it's happy I just have to stick with that position. 

 

But as I say its more expirence than anything else. As I mentioned this really put me off Shapeways as they don't care much about the quality they care how many models they can put in the machine... Which then affects the quality. 

Edited July 20, 2019 by Bluebell Model Railway

[Tony Teague]

7 hours ago, Bluebell Model Railway said:

Hi Tony, 

 

 Its mentioned on the 3d print groups on RMWEB but it's something you learn through expirence, and knowledge of that model. 

 For example your locomotive probably should of been printed on its end or at an angle, due to its boiler which may have removed some of the flatter faces which make up a circle. 

I probably would of removed the chimney and dome and printed them separately, to improve quality. 

 I have 2 printers of my own and I've had to change the model positioning twice to get a good print but now I've found where it's happy I just have to stick with that position. 

 

But as I say its more expirence than anything else. As I mentioned this really put me off Shapeways as they don't care much about the quality they care how many models they can put in the machine... Which then affects the quality. 

 

Thanks Matt

 

I'll take these points up with the designer of my models, but it is worth saying that I am not unhappy with the finish of this loco; since Shapeways moved up to the latest plastic it is getting pretty smooth - although of course, it could always be better!

 

Thanks again for your thoughts on this.

 

Tony

[Bluebell Model Railway]

Hi Tony, 

 

 If you own the model may I make a suggestion? Like you I am not a fan of Shapeways and your not happy with what you have. 

 

 Have a look at 3d hubs. 

This is a site where people have their home printers listed, and usually these guys are really good. 

 As it shows you people in the UK it's cheaper and quicker and usually better quality than Shapeways. 

 

Look for SLA, DLP resin printers... And and it will give you a rough price, and you can look at what each person offers and what resolution you want... Very handy and very good quality and also quick. 

 

Hope this helps. 

 

 

[Tony Teague]

2 hours ago, Bluebell Model Railway said:

Hi Tony, 

 

 If you own the model may I make a suggestion? Like you I am not a fan of Shapeways and your not happy with what you have. 

 

 Have a look at 3d hubs. 

This is a site where people have their home printers listed, and usually these guys are really good. 

 As it shows you people in the UK it's cheaper and quicker and usually better quality than Shapeways. 

 

Look for SLA, DLP resin printers... And and it will give you a rough price, and you can look at what each person offers and what resolution you want... Very handy and very good quality and also quick. 

 

Hope this helps. 

 

 

 

I think you may have mis-read my post.

To be clear, I am happy with the model and relatively so with Shapeways, nevertheless I will certainly look at the site that you refer to.

It is always good to have options, especially if they are better and cheaper!

 

Tony

[thegreenhowards]

Tony,

 

I think the E4-X looks great. The difference between the unpainted and painted model in terms of visible lines is quite dramatic, and I'm sure the minimal evidence of lines that remain will not notice at normal viewing distances.

 

Having said that, I wanted to challenge the comment that it's not a good idea to use filler primer on 3d printed models. Obviously it will depend on the model, but I've found that for large flat surfaces (such as tank sides), a spray of Halfords filler primer and rub down works very well. For example I show a picture of my 3D printed ex-GNR N1 (sorry about the LNER influence for you Southern aficionados). This was printed by Shapeways about 3 years ago and was quite badly affected by print lines. I used a coat of normal primer and a couple of coats of filler primer rubbed down in between to get the finish here, which I think is pretty good (sorry about the dust!).

 

Andy

Edited July 21, 2019 by thegreenhowards
typo

[Tony Teague]

Hi Andy

 

Glad you like the E4-X - and unquestionably, your N1 LNER-thingy looks good after smoothing - especially if it was printed 3 years ago  when Shapeways 'best' was not as good as it now is.

I have another 3D printed body in hand so I might experiment a bit with the filler primer, but my concern is that the roughest areas are usually where it is most difficult to rub down, and that small details such as rivets might be lost.

Nevertheless, it is always worth trying a new approach.

 

Tony

[manna]

G'Day Folks

 

N1s and J52 were quite common in some areas of the Southern Railway.

 

manna

[mullie]

Ex Great Eastern locos visited via the East London line too.

[Tony Teague]

A small number of 'visiting' locos are present from time to time at either Stowe Magna or Churminster but they were probably picked on the basis that I liked them, or that they were a bargain - neither of which is very scientific!

Back on p.12 of this thread in August 2018, I did actually pose the question as to what visiting locos should be present on the layout but the answers were a bit thin and included GWR 43xx and Halls, LNER V2's (for a specific period which is a bit late for me), WD's and LNER N1, N2 & J52's, but as I said at the time, it all depends upon where exactly within the Southern area you think Churminster & Stowe Magna is situated - and opinions are divided!

It is certainly something worth exploring further in one of those "idle moments".

 

Tony

 

[Tony Teague]

Thanks Alex - interesting.

These odd workings are ecertainly worth looking out for.

In "my" era the Sunny South Express normally changed locos at Rugby - which is a good example of an SR loco (often an ex-LBSCR I3) working through onto LMS metals - so there may also have been times where the opposite was true.

Tony

[Tony Teague]

My recent re-publishing of the 'missing locos" list prompted Jack P to ask me about the R class loco that I have had in-build for over 3 years, so here goes.

 

As I am sure everyone who follows this thread will know, the SR had two different R class locos each with an R1 equivalent!

 

These were the ex-SER Stirling 0-6-0T Goods Tank Engines plus the Wainwright R1 upgrade of the same, and the ex-LCDR Kirtley 0-4-4T Passenger Tank Engines, plus 2nd upgraded batch (R1), also by Kirtley. Why they did not re-classify one of the two classes is beyond me!

 

Within my collection I have models of:

 

 

1. No.1124 - Stirling, ex-SER R class 0-6-0T with a short chimney and never rebuilt to R1, withdrawn 1943 - from SEF kit ref: F193 - this class was entirely scrapped before 1948, so whilst it is OK for my time period, it doesn't count against my specific objective.

 

 

2. No.1336 - as above, a Stirling, ex-SER R class 0-6-0T but with original (taller) chimney and never rebuilt to R1, withdrawn 1941 - from SEF kit ref: F193 (NB - shows that a rough finish may not just be confined to 3D prints - this is poorly prepared [by me] white metal).

 

 

3. No.1047 - Wainwright class R1 re-build of a Stirling, ex-SER R class 0-6-0T but with original (taller) chimney - from SEF kit ref: F192

 

 

4. No.1710 - Kirtley, ex-LCDR R1 class 0-4-4T, built by Sharp Stewart & push-pull fitted - from Q Kits kit

 

So what is missing is a Kirtley ex-LCDR, 1st batch R class 0-4-4T, which is what I have been building (to be No.1673) from SEF kit F188!

 

Trust all is now clear!

 

Tony

Edited November 10, 2022 by Tony Teague

[Tony Teague]

It is some time since I posted, and whilst I have been distracted by other, non-railway, events I have not been completely idle!

 

I have been working on a 3D printed 6 wheel SECR brake van (of which more in a later post) - which has absorbed a lot of effort for what I suspect will be a mediocre result - plus sorting out a further batch of locos for weathering.

 

So far, my reckoning is that I have only managed to weather about 11% of the fleet - so plenty to go at!

 

Whilst sorting things out I wondered what Churminster might look like as a Western Division shed, with all ex-LSWR locos, and here it is:

 

 

Visible are T1 no.6, '700 class' nos.693 & 695, a couple of T9's, the back end of N15 No.785 'Sir Mador de la Port', and an O2; I am pleased to say that they at least, are all weathered!

 

In terms of what is weathered next, there are three SR Maunsell class Q locos in the fleet, and these are amongst those chosen for imminent attention; what I had not realised was just how different these three were, despite all coming from the same (Wills / SE Finecast) body kit:

 

 

No.531 is undoubtedly the best of the three models for accuracy; it was built by DLT of this Parish and has a High Level gearbox, a Mashima motor, a wide chimney, and a Bachmann tender; DLT has added many details including correctly re-shaping the boiler support brackets at the front - only no.530 had them as originally represented in the kit.

 

 

I acquired no.533 from the estate of a deceased modeller who presumably built the body himself; It has a Triang chassis which shows - because the wheel spacing is wrong and the wheels are slightly out of line with the splashers! It's XO4 motor is very noisy and so at some point it will have to have a new chassis, motor & gearbox. The incorrectly shaped front boiler support bracket shows!

 

 

No.543 was built for me some years ago by Chris Phillips; it has the upgraded SE Finecast chassis (as does no.531) but was still supplied with an open frame motor - nevertheless it is not as noisy as no.533! It too has the incorrect bracket to the front - I shall have to take a file to both locos at some point - perhaps prior to weathering?

 

 

The Maunsell Q is a favourite of mine, as exemplified by this image that I shot of the surviving prototype no.541, during a visit it made to the mid-Hants Railway a couple of years ago, from its home on the Bluebell Railway.

 

 

I will post some further images of the model Q class locos after weathering, along with the rest of the batch that I intend to deal with.

 

I also expect to be able imminently, to post a picture of a new arrival which will cross yet another "missing loco" off the list!

 

Tony

[Mick Bonwick]

I'm not sure weather to applaud or not. 

 

Actually, I lied. Very good post, Tony. Lots of applause. 

[Tony Teague]

8 hours ago, Mick Bonwick said:

Actually, I lied. Very good post, Tony. Lots of applause. 

 

Thanks Mick.

I was musing last night as to how it can possibly be that two of my three Q's have so many flaws - it turns out that they should also have large chimneys - and I think this shows just how much my own knowledge has improved over recent years.

In the case of no.543, it was delivered to me in 2003 which probably means that I ordered it in about 2001 - 18 years ago; back then, I certainly didn't have the knowledge or reference resources that I have now, plus I probably wasn't as interested in prototypical accuracy - I just wanted a Q !

No.533 was more of an impulse purchase; it wasn't researched and didn't cost very much, nevertheless I think both are capable of improvement and will go onto the 'roundtuit' list.

Tony

[Tony Teague]

5 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

I was musing last night as to how it can possibly be that two of my three Q's have so many flaws - it turns out that they should also have large chimneys - and I think this shows just how much my own knowledge has improved over recent years.

 

Just to illustrate the power of good research, I consulted the latest Irwell Press volume "Southern Workhorses: Q 0-6-0's" after writing the above, and it seems that of my small chimney Q's would have stayed as they are until 1948 / 9 respectively - so no need for me to change the chimneys or remove the snifters after all!

 

In the meantime Royal Mail delivered the parcel that I was expecting and I can now reveal the latest member of the loco fleet:

 

 

This is 400S, one of the Southern Railway's two150hp Fowler Diesel shunters, acquired in 1946; this one was used in the Dock's Engineer's Department at Southampton.

 

 

The model was commissioned from Mike Edge and this is the first build of what will shortly be released as a kit (see:

or:

 

 

 

It is seen here on brief loan to Churminster Quarry, as their own shunter is temporarily out of service!

 

And so here now is the updates and very slightly shortened "missing loco" list as a reminder of what still has to be secured - I had hoped to have completed the E5X by now but other things have intervened:

 

LB&SCR Billinton E5X    (4) - build in hand - 3D printed body held and SEF E5 chassis part built - this will be next to be completed

SR Maunsell I1X             (18) - 3D printed body now in design + Alan Gibson milled chassis frames to hand

LB&SCR Marsh C3        (8) - design & drawings in hand for delivery of a 'kit of parts'

LSWR Drummond S11   (10) - further set of L12 body parts in hand; sourcing correct wheels for adapted SE Finecast T9 chassis (think T9 with large boiler & smaller wheels)

SECR Wainwright F1      (9) - SER Kits have design and drawings in hand for a 7mm kit which they are prepared to scale down to produce 4mm etches

LB&SCR Billinton B4X   (12) - potential solution through a 3D printed body under exploration

LB&SCR Marsh D3X      (1) - potential solution through an intended 3D printed body, chassis still to be sourced
LSWR Drummond C14  (3) - although a CSP / Agenoria kit was announced years ago, delivery seems unlikely and so I have identified an alternate supplier

KESR 0-8-0T Hecate      (1) - supplier identified who will take this forward
Soton Dock Co. 0458      (1) - possible solution to modify CSP Agenoria kit CSP 04 identified & kit now obtained

DS75                               (1) - solution identified involving newly designed & drawn etches / castings

SECR Wainwright B1    (16) - Jidenco kit in hand but need to find a builder - this kit is way beyond me! Alternate solution to await production of SER Kits etches

 

We are getting there slowly!

 

Tony

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Tony Teague

[Tony Teague]

Some further pics of 400S:

 

1. The only diseasels in town?

 

 

2. Tiny Departmentals:

 

 

3. Little & Large:

 

 

Tony

[Allegheny1600]

Hi Tony,

Those diesels look really nice to me, I thought at first you were demonstrating 4mm, 3.5mm and 3mm scales!

Beautiful! Mr Edge has done an excellent job of number 4003.

Cheers,

John.

[Tony Teague]

11 minutes ago, Allegheny1600 said:

Hi Tony,

Those diesels look really nice to me, I thought at first you were demonstrating 4mm, 3.5mm and 3mm scales!

Beautiful! Mr Edge has done an excellent job of number 4003.

Cheers,

John.

 

Thanks John

I confirm they are all 4mm!

DS1169, the Ruston Hornsby 48DS is also one of Mike Edge's kits.

Tony

[Jack P]

They all look fantastic posed together Tony! 

 

Will you be adding a Bulleid Diesel shunter to the fleet - or is that too late for your chosen time-frame? 

[Tony Teague]

13 hours ago, Jack P said:

They all look fantastic posed together Tony! 

 

Will you be adding a Bulleid Diesel shunter to the fleet - or is that too late for your chosen time-frame? 

 

Hi Jack

I'm tempted but strictly speaking it is too late.

Tony

[Jack P]

On 20/08/2019 at 21:48, Tony Teague said:

Hi Jack

I'm tempted but strictly speaking it is too late.

Tony

 

Rool 1? 

[Tony Teague]

3 hours ago, Jack P said:

 

Rool 1? 

 

I'm not ruling it out, but I'd prefer to clear the "missing locos" list first!

[Tony Teague]

It was back in June, and about 3 pages ago, that I suddenly set off on building about a dozen wagon kits, some of which had been part-built and were hiding around the railway room in various drawers.

 

I finished most of them but there were a couple that were in the more difficult category and so I confess that I put them to one side.

 

I am pleased to say that one of them, an ancient kit by Maple Models, is now complete:

 

 

It is an ex-LSWR low-sided 10T van of 1911 to d.1410 and I am now reasonably happy with it.

 

What put me off was that the kit had no underframe and was made from a very brittle, translucent resin material; the van base had snapped in two and the tissue paper in which the parts were wrapped was stuck fast to the back of each part! Some of the parts were warped and getting each corner completely square was not possible.

 

 

I used an underframe from Comet and filled the corners before painting, and in fact, I feel the original mounlding is pretty sharp and stands up to comparison with other models:

 

 

A Slaters LMS coke wagon is in the centre and a David Geen SR meat van to the right.

 

The one wagon from that batch that remains to be finished is the SR ballast plough brake that needed repainting; after stripping it down and masking the windows I have repainted the sides and ends in what are supposed to be different paint colours - but the problem is - they both look the same!

 

I am considering my next move!

 

Tony

 

 

[thegreenhowards]

2 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I am considering my next move!

 

Tony

Weathering?

[Tony Teague]

10 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Weathering?

 

Jack

Weathering could be the answer or part of it.

Vol.3 of the Illustrated History of Southern Wagons says that this vehicle was painted in Engineering Dept red oxide, with Venetian red ends.

I used Precision Paints red oxide and SR Venetian Red and they might just as well have come out of the same tin!

Of course that may be right, but I am now searching other reference books for a colour picture which might give a better indication as to whether there was actually a more marked difference.

Best wishes

Tony