Jump to content
 

Churminster & Stowe Magna, Southern Railway


Tony Teague
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

SJPP116000802210116.jpg.24ed6fa2734d3ce407a599bf56a518af.jpg

 

Given the problems that I3 no.2023 had experienced in getting & keeping the Sunny South Express moving, I decided that it was time for a test of 'pulling power'!

 

SJPP116000102210116.jpg.f0952e8261af4310030661a923ed7e72.jpg

 

I summoned all four of the I3 locomotives in the fleet to Stowe Magna Yard and got each in turn to make a test run.

 

SJPP116001002210116.jpg.f147ba19c982cc4875a8e3ee899299ae.jpg

 

The two locos in plain black livery, nos.2030 and 2087 are both OO Works locos, as is no.2023 and so unsurprisingly they exhibited the same characteristics, despite these being pretty heavy locos with quite a lot of metal in their construction (not sure why the side tank of no.2087 looks 'glittery' - perhaps condensation from cold water in the tank?).

 

SJPP116000602210116.jpg.c364189c287db2a6a68b8a23d0318915.jpg

 

So I turned to no.2091, which is an SE Finecast loco and which, with a white metal superstructure, is certainly heavier than the other three - but disappointingly, the result was just the same!

 

SJPP116000302210116.jpg.4533d462451e57dd6c3c5489508c504f.jpg

 

I then added some lead inside no.2091's body shell (there is no room inside the OO Works model) and tried again - no change! :fie:

 

The train itself appears to be very free running, all coaches are plastic, and all but the three Dapol ones have pin-pount brass bearings, but the problem seems to appear mainly when the train is pulled through some reverse curves as it comes out of the fiddle yard.

 

This is not the longest, and certainly not the heaviest train running on Stowe Magna & Churinster, but it probably is the longest and heaviest for which I am trying to use a four-coupled loco, so before I give up on the I3's and bring in a six-coupled engine, I will try upgrading the bearings on the Dapol coach bogies, but I am not optimistic. :(

 

Tony

Try your I3's with the carrying wheels temporarily removed and see if that improves haulage. I found on a friends model that the bogie and pony were taking some of the weight of the loco. A little bit of work to allow more weight to be taken by the driving wheels and his is now more than happy on a fairly heavy and not particularly free running rake of 6 BSL carriages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, jamespetts said:

Interesting - how many carriages can the I3s pull?

 

Well after trying the test suggested by Andy I got a very marginal improvement but the bottom line is that 8 carriages in possible but 7 carriages is comfortable - and at that point it makes no difference whether they are Hornby or Dapol, so the first decision made was not to worry about pin-point axles on the Dapol bogies; the bogies are made from a very hard wearing but smooth looking polythene plastic and I don't feel that they are adding much resistance at all.

 

2 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

 

I often wonder about that when I’m fitting corridor connectors to my Kirk coaches. I wonder whether we, as modellers, have got conditioned to seeing a bit of plastic sticking out and therefore it looks strange when it’s not there. Surely the bit of plastic is just representing a folded up corridor connector? I now stick my ‘Fair Price Models’ (1/5 the price of modellers Mecca) corridor connectors straight into the end and I think it looks OK.

 

 

Andy, in this case the aperture at the end of the Dapol coaches is designed to have a slide in insert which then forms the corridor, however, the aperture provided is too wide to apply the paper corridor directly to it, so I had to use the plastic lump, but cut down to a single rib. In other cases - especuailly with Kirks and brass coaches, I have done as you suggest.

 

2 hours ago, Denbridge said:

Try your I3's with the carrying wheels temporarily removed and see if that improves haulage. I found on a friends model that the bogie and pony were taking some of the weight of the loco. A little bit of work to allow more weight to be taken by the driving wheels and his is now more than happy on a fairly heavy and not particularly free running rake of 6 BSL carriages.

 

This is a good suggestion and another one that I will try, although its hard to imagine that all four locos would be put together in this way.

 

Since I started on this train I have realised that in its current position in the fiddle yard it can't be more than 8 coaches long because it then fouls the detector for the train behind, however, if I could get it to pull 9, then I could move it to a different / longer road. Using a 6 coupled tender loco might reduce this further because of the additional length of the tender - so I might not gain much if I went that route!

 

It seems to me that the optimum solution would probably be the I3 + 8, so I haven't given up on that additional coach yet!

 

Tony

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

its hard to imagine that all four locos would be put together in this way.

 

Both of my Hornby H's and another one that I tinkered with had a little clear spacer in the rear bogie arrangement, this served to lift the rear driving wheel ( the driven one) ever so slightly off the track, causing it to spin, even when running light engine, I've since removed this from all 3 and it's improved running dramatically. You're right that it would be a bit odd for all of the I3's to be assembled with this error, but if it's built into the design, it's a possibility? 

 

By the way, those OO works I3's look excellent!

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Jack P said:

 

Both of my Hornby H's and another one that I tinkered with had a little clear spacer in the rear bogie arrangement, this served to lift the rear driving wheel ( the driven one) ever so slightly off the track, causing it to spin, even when running light engine, I've since removed this from all 3 and it's improved running dramatically. You're right that it would be a bit odd for all of the I3's to be assembled with this error, but if it's built into the design, it's a possibility? 

 

By the way, those OO works I3's look excellent!

 

Thanks Jack - very interesting / not least because my Hornby H class locos are also poor haulers.

I will certainly look at this aspect.

I feel that the I3 is one of OO Works better creations - overall they have steadily improved since they first started.

Tony

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

In the process of finishing off the Sunny South Express, I realised that when I acquired the three Dapol corridor composite kits I had also acquired three of their brake third kits. Subsequently the far superior Hornby model was issued and these are in the Sunny South rake.

 

Which means I had three spare brake composite kits, but at the same tme I had been looking at that picture of the LMS Euston - East Croydon parcels train, headed by a Webb Coal tank and trying to work out what was behind the engine.

 

It occurred to me that the front of the leading coach looked remarkably like the brake end of the brake 3rd, and so I put together one of the spare kits:

 

1349226258_SJP2021-01-1719-24-20(BRadius8Smoothing4)02210117.jpg.18653ace0d8af31cb96e636d25d664cf.jpg

 

I have also replaced one of the two Stove R vans that were in my original image (previous page) with an LMS 50' BG, and I think this looks much more like the image in the Klapper book - and more convincing.

 

Just needs weathering now.... like everything else!

 

Tony

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 19
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony Teague said:

 

Thanks Jack - very interesting / not least because my Hornby H class locos are also poor haulers.

I will certainly look at this aspect.

I feel that the I3 is one of OO Works better creations - overall they have steadily improved since they first started.

Tony

 

In fairness, the H was later classified by BR as 1P, so they probably couldn't manage much, I'm sure I've seen photos of them at the head of a rake of birdcages though. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

On 17/01/2021 at 22:23, Jack P said:

 

In fairness, the H was later classified by BR as 1P, so they probably couldn't manage much, I'm sure I've seen photos of them at the head of a rake of birdcages though. 

 

Well even in reservation the Bluebell's H class is used to pull reasonable length trains up the gradient to East Grinstead - so a model ought to be able to match that:

 

SJPIMG_502802131027.jpg.19feb793bad897ee8da8966105254d40.jpg

 

Hardly an emulation of the 'Arrow, but seen here with 2 Pullman's and mark 1 and their BG/kitchen.

 

SJPIMG_237502130602.jpg.9c20f0834c8d4072726bc523020ad338.jpg

 

And here with the Metropolitan set (of 4) plus their SECR 100 seater.

 

(I can post these because I took them!).

 

Tony

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony,
I find your tribulations with the I3 interesting. Not least because I have one to build.
Wills kits, in my experience , are usually easy to get to pull a decent train. Your LMS rake is not particularly heavy. I have a similar rake and my Millholme L&Y Aspinall atlantic pulls it fine.
I bet that's not much heavier than an I3 and it is hauling a tender.
I'll let you know what happens with my I3.
Regards,
Chris.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 minutes ago, Sandhole said:

Tony,
I find your tribulations with the I3 interesting. Not least because I have one to build.
Wills kits, in my experience , are usually easy to get to pull a decent train. Your LMS rake is not particularly heavy. I have a similar rake and my Millholme L&Y Aspinall atlantic pulls it fine.
I bet that's not much heavier than an I3 and it is hauling a tender.
I'll let you know what happens with my I3.
Regards,
Chris.

 

Chris

Interesting - I'll post here whatever I find about whether the bogie is reducing traction from the driving wheels.

The other thing I have been wondering about is whether the fitted motor is man enough for the job.

Its a Mashima (I think) but whether it is of the right power and / or suitably geared I have yet to discover.

There is room inside for even more lead (& probably a bigger motor) but I didn't continue to add lead because I had reached the point where if the loco stalled, the wheels were not spinning - which in my view means there would be a danger of the motor burning out.

The OO Works versions have coreless motors.

Tony

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Tony Teague said:

 

Chris

Interesting - I'll post here whatever I find about whether the bogie is reducing traction from the driving wheels.

The other thing I have been wondering about is whether the fitted motor is man enough for the job.

Its a Mashima (I think) but whether it is of the right power and / or suitably geared I have yet to discover.

There is room inside for even more lead (& probably a bigger motor) but I didn't continue to add lead because I had reached the point where if the loco stalled, the wheels were not spinning - which in my view means there would be a danger of the motor burning out.

The OO Works versions have coreless motors.

Tony

 

 

I totally agree with you about the motor.
I learnt that lesson with a DJH Clan. Brian, who built it for me fitted a 50:1 gearbox and a mashima at my request, he would have used a 30:1 box.. It wouldn't pick it's feet up at all. Result?
One dead Mashima.
Stupid question.
The pivot arm for the front bogie isn't too bent is it. 
Again, I've had that with a whitemetal pivot arm. I just gently bent it and the running improved.
Just a thought.
Chris.

Edited by Sandhole
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

 

Chris

Interesting - I'll post here whatever I find about whether the bogie is reducing traction from the driving wheels.

The other thing I have been wondering about is whether the fitted motor is man enough for the job.

Its a Mashima (I think) but whether it is of the right power and / or suitably geared I have yet to discover.

There is room inside for even more lead (& probably a bigger motor) but I didn't continue to add lead because I had reached the point where if the loco stalled, the wheels were not spinning - which in my view means there would be a danger of the motor burning out.

The OO Works versions have coreless motors.

Tony

 

 

Any loco must be able to spin its wheels at full power, this is in effect a safety valve for the motor.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 hours ago, Sandhole said:

I totally agree with you about the motor.
I learnt that lesson with a DJH Clan. Brian, who built it for me fitted a 50:1 gearbox and a mashima at my request, he would have used a 30:1 box.. It wouldn't pick it's feet up at all. Result?
One dead Mashima.
Stupid question.
The pivot arm for the front bogie isn't too bent is it. 
Again, I've had that with a whitemetal pivot arm. I just gently bent it and the running improved.
Just a thought.
Chris.

 

43 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

Any loco must be able to spin its wheels at full power, this is in effect a safety valve for the motor.

 

Thanks Chris, Mike

 

I will look at the bogie pivot arm but an underpowered motor and / or wrong gearbox ratio is beginning to look like a key issue.

 

Tony

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

A very quick update in case people think I must have fallen asleep.....:lazy:

 

As long term followers know, I just hate re-visiting things or doing them twice, so I'm afraid the I3 problems caused me to lose interest in the Sunny South Express - however, I will take a look at the motor inside the loco and report back shortly.

 

In the meantime, and following three days loss of mojo :fie:,  I have started to install the wiring required to make the semaphore signals work, once they have arrived, post-covid; I particularly needed to do this behind the chalk wall of the cutting that I recently installed as there is a distant signal to be located just ahead of the tunnel mouth.

 

Since this is the semaphore furthest from the control panel it made sense to start the wiring there and work back towards the panel making provision for each signal on the way - so that is what is absorbing me at present, and it should also enable me to make further progress on the landform between the tunnel and the panel.

 

Regret no pictures because running wires and soldering them to tag strips is not very photogenic!

 

Tony

  • Like 7
  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Well I persuaded myself to go look again at the offending I3, and to my surprise it did not contain a Mashima motor at all, rather it has a 5 pole open frame motor which must have come with the kit:

 

SJPP126002802210126.jpg.adced8a49fc8139bd471fc6ee45b8747.jpg

 

I am not an expert and so I have no idea as to comparative performance, but I would imagine that with a suitably sized can motor and appropriately geared box, this thing would be likely to perform better - despite only having 4 driving wheels.

 

In consequence the loco has been withdrawn from service and has been banished to the 'criple drawer' until such time as I get around to it - or persuade somebody to sort it out for me! (no shame here!).

 

In the meantime, the Sunny South Express duty has been handed to an 'Arthur, which had no difficulty in shifting it.

 

Tony

Edited by Tony Teague
  • Like 6
  • Friendly/supportive 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Thanks Mike - I had actually thought that all Mashima's were can motors - shows my ignorance!

I have some larger ones in stock, so this is probably about finding the right motor / gearbox combination that will fit within the available space.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Test build of the C3 has commenced.

Chassis next - This one will be unmotored  as it is just a test of how it all goes together [if at all!]. The 'proper' 7mm version will of course be powered as will the 4mm one that eventually goes to Stowe Magna.

 

1903339986_2-cab_valances-footplatesoldered.JPG.c0289017c14d703727a7ab3cb8819a5a.JPG

  • Like 5
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

There can be few more tedious railway modelling tasks than laying ballast - but I think I have found one! :crazy_mini:

 

It involves threading tiny insulator 'pots' onto code 60 rail before it can be installed as 'electrified' 3rd rail:

 

 

Thank heavens that electrification didn't reach the Isle of Portland. :locomotive:

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mick Bonwick said:

 

Thank heavens that electrification didn't reach the Isle of Portland. :locomotive:

All the lights would have dimmed, LPs would have played at the wrong speed and the navy would have stopped functioning!

 

Martyn

  • Like 1
  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chassis built using the rather fine jig that Comet/Wizard do. These brass cylinders [only one of the four in the set shown] are 10.9mm wide so for a 10thou [0.3mm] set of frames with half-etched slots, the spacer width to be drawn needs to be 10.9 + 2 x 0.3/2 = 11.2mm wide. The grooved beading for the cab cuts-outs is in place as that stops me from stabbing myself on the points as are the buffer beam and drag beam - essential to ensure that the chassis fits. The parts of the top hat bearings inside the frames fit nicely into circular cut-outs in the sides of these cylindrical spacers.

The chassis didn't fit - it was fractionally too long!! so a quick attack with a file and one more thing to amend on Stowe Magna's eventual C3's etch.

But that's the whole point of a test etch.

6-check chassis for fit..JPG

Edited by Arun Sharma
  • Like 9
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4
  • Round of applause 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...