Brightsparks Workbench thread- DJH S15

[brightspark]

Thanks for the kind comments playmates. 

 

Hi John, yes I am pleased as to how it turned out especially as it has attracted such kind comments.

 

As Richard says, they are easy to put together, and are intended for OO. But don't be put off by the thought of going to EM or P4. If you are building kits/ scratch building, then life can become a little easier in the wider gauges as you have a bit more room in the chassis and less compromises to make when dimensioning.

 

The only problem with these old kits is that dimensionally they can be a bit out. It just depends on how much modelling you wish to do.

The hardest bit is taking the first step and accepting that you will make mistakes. But you will learn from them and become better.

 

Hi JRG1.

I am glad that you enjoyed it. I have read the notes that D.A. Williams wrote of his build of the Jidenco Claughton that circulates Met Junction. He described it as 95% scratch-built.

 

I see that this thread is mentioned in the Tony Wright thread [page 1931].

 

By the way, the loco now has crew and a suitable layer of dirt. I really must take a photo.

[brightspark]

So here is 838 dirtied up and with crew. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I based the weathering on a photo of 30840 at Woking in 1964. It looked similar to other photos of S15's but in colour. The photo is on page 9 of "The steaming sixties, No6 From Woking to Weymouth" by George Reeve, Irwell Press.

What struck me is that the weathering was made up of streaks running from the top down and dust from the bottom up. But still, what was described in another book, "reasonably clean".

The photo also has the fireman with a knotted hanky on his head.

I seem to recall being told that crews from different sheds had particular dress codes. Nine Elms men wearing a tie with a safety pin holding the collar tight and Feltham crews favouring the knotted handkerchief. Has anyone else heard of this?

 

Andy

Edited December 25, 2023 by brightspark
reattach photos

[30368]

Hi Andy,

 

Really like the Maunsell S15, weathering is very good. I must have seen 838 and 840 many times at Woking. We lived there in the 1950s and 60s (Sheerwater, Guildford Road and finally St Johns) and my father had a workshop overlooking the station until 1967 or so. I started my train spotting on Woking station, plenty to see then.

 

We moved to Old Basing in 1962/3 where I discovered the delights of viewing Basingstoke shed yard each morning on my way to school hence my desire to build many of the loco's shedded at 70D and to restore my layout based on 70D.

 

Keep up the good work.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

 

[brightspark]

 

I'll finish this thread with a lovely portrait taken by Mr Tony Wright.

His comment was along the lines of, "lovely loco, but why did you bother to add compensation".

Edited December 20, 2023 by brightspark
reattach photo

[Blandford1969]

As per your comment on Wright Writes , It would be great to see the photos in this thread as the rebuild of a DJH S15 is beconin and your thread looked very helpful

[brightspark]

1 hour ago, Blandford1969 said:

As per your comment on Wright Writes , It would be great to see the photos in this thread as the rebuild of a DJH S15 is beconin and your thread looked very helpful

Yes, hunting them down and loading. But its a slow process and I deleted some.

[burgundy]

2 hours ago, brightspark said:

Yes, hunting them down and loading. But its a slow process and I deleted some.

Deleted

 

Edited December 21, 2023 by burgundy

[brightspark]

...from my files, not thinking that I would need them again.

 

[Pebbles]

Many years ago I was contemplating building masters for a S15, at the time the only drawing I had was by Iain Beatie in Railway Modeller. After completing the footplate I ran into a problem, I therefore got me a copy of D L Bradley's -Urie class locomotives. 

 

From drawings in Bradley I concluded that the Beatie drawing, with regards to the footplate, was wrong the centre section of the footplate being to high relative to the buffer beam. 

 

It was a long time ago, and maybe someone else would like to check it out.  If I'm correct this could explain the problems with the location of the cylinders.

 

 

[brightspark]

Yes the Beatie drawing is wrong.

Cylinders are in the wrong place. I don't know about the height of the footplate.

Would have to check against the GA drawing.

 

To be fair to him, the drawings he did were probably the best considering the information available at the time. 

Errors happen and as they are discovered we can correct them.