Jump to content

Corbs

Show us your Pugbashes, Nellieboshes, Desmondifications, Jintysteins

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, papagolfjuliet said:

This may be of interest: a relatively simple modification to the cab of a Hornby Holden tank.

pug_bash_12.jpg

Hi PGJ

 

That is definitely a case of less is more, a huge difference to appearance.

 

Gibbo.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 

Gosh that takes me back Phil.  I was about the same age when I did the same conversion on an Triang L1.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another, which is not my work but which would be dead easy to replicate: J83 body + Hornby 'Toy Story' 4-4-0 chassis + replacement pony truck + Plasticard stretcher = Drummond D50. Or, keep the original pony truck for a Drummond D51.

 

The number is wrong: 10392 was scrapped while still in NBR livery.

20200113_070732.jpg

  • Like 11
  • Craftsmanship/clever 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, phil_sutters said:

Did some one say Triang L1? Here's one I bashed 50+years ago! It may not look too much like a 2P but I was only about 20 with limited tools and finance.

Midland 2P 4-4-0  LSWR van & SDJR brake third.jpg

 

Back then it looked like a 2P. Triang-Hornby even produced one (black with red lining).

 

We were rather less demanding in those days.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't looked at this thread in a hot minute (so I'm a little late:unsure:), but if one wished to take a Bachy Thomas/not Thomas and make a 2-2-2 out of it why not go full out and make a 4-2-4?

 

(Not my photo and I don't know who to credit)

510a50110886a0031b97946c68fac25b.jpg

Edited by CinderMonkey
My atrocious grammar
  • Like 7
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CinderMonkey said:

I haven't looked at this thread in a hot minute (so I'm a little late:unsure:), but if one wished to take a Bachy Thomas/not Thomas and make a 2-2-2 out of it why not go full out and make a 4-2-4?

 

(Not my photo and I don't know who to credit)

510a50110886a0031b97946c68fac25b.jpg

 

Just to be pedantic, it is a 2-2-2, the front and rear sets are on a monorail! (for want of a better way to describe it)

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me that the bogies are 2-wheel apiece, not 2 axle?

 

Stewart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link PaulRhB. Very interesting. The text describes this loco as a 1-1-2-1-1. However it also says

 

"the outside road wheels were 3' 9" in diameter, and there was also a rail wheel of the same diameter in the centre of the axle"

 

so does that make it a 1-1-3-1-1 ? ^_^

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tullygrainey said:

Thanks for the link PaulRhB. Very interesting. The text describes this loco as a 1-1-2-1-1. However it also says

 

"the outside road wheels were 3' 9" in diameter, and there was also a rail wheel of the same diameter in the centre of the axle"

 

so does that make it a 1-1-3-1-1 ? ^_^

I'd say a 2-3-2 as the front and rear wheels are each on a bogie and unpowered. Would you call a GWR Hall a 2-2-6-0? Of course not (and it would be technically wrong anyway)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooooo......is it a railway locomotive? Or a traction engine?  Or, what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, alastairq said:

Soooooo......is it a railway locomotive? Or a traction engine?  Or, what?

Dunno. It's cute but hurts my brain at the same time

  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BernardTPM said:

I'd say a 2-3-2 as the front and rear wheels are each on a bogie and unpowered. Would you call a GWR Hall a 2-2-6-0? Of course not (and it would be technically wrong anyway)

That makes sense... I think...

I think thinking is where I went wrong with this

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alastairq said:

Soooooo......is it a railway locomotive? Or a traction engine?  Or, what?

It's a monorail locomotive.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alastairq said:

Soooooo......is it a railway locomotive? Or a traction engine?  Or, what?

Maybe a Guided Traction Engine?

 

John

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

 

Surely it is a 4/2-2-4/2.

 

Gibbo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi Folks,

 

Surely it is a 4/2-2-4/2.

 

Gibbo.

???  There's only one powered axle and it has three wheels on it (Yes, that is odd in itself). I am not aware that Mr. Whyte used  /  at all. Then again, he didn't devise his notation for monorail systems. Given it was used on the Continent, perhaps it should be a 2A2, just counting the axles.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, alastairq said:

it's got outriggers!

That raises an interesting point. Were the outer wheels actually fixed to the driving axle? They seem to have sanding gear so the answer is probably yes, unless the sanding is just for braking.

Edited by BernardTPM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BernardTPM said:

???  There's only one powered axle and it has three wheels on it (Yes, that is odd in itself). I am not aware that Mr. Whyte used  /  at all. Then again, he didn't devise his notation for monorail systems. Given it was used on the Continent, perhaps it should be a 2A2, just counting the axles.

Hi Bernard,

 

Quite right, my mistake, how about, 4/3-3-4/3 or perhaps (2/3)* 1.5-A*1.5-(2/3)*1.5 including wheels ?

 

Madness !!!

 

Gibbo.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

One thing is for sure, it wasn't a great idea!

Edited by BernardTPM
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best question is who's going to make this out of a not-Thomas?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

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.