Kerr Stuart ‘Victory’ Class – A 7mm RTR Makeover

[3 link]

Hi David,

 

Always look forward to reading your updates, the cab looks amazing and your work is an incentive to us all.

 

Regards,

 

Martyn.

 

PS, Your magnetic uncoupler is earning its keep, and has come in very handy.

Edited February 17, 2018 by 3 link

[Night Train]

Superb.

[PGH]

David,

 

The skill and craftsmanship displayed in this thread is truly outstanding and I think we should all be grateful for your detailed description of exactly how the results were achieved.

 

However there is one aspect of the prototype locomotive that I'm very curious about - the rear extension of the footplate and frames.  As stated in the first post, No.41 (KS 3074) was one of the last two to be built and the pair were despatched together from the builder on 14/9/1917, just over two weeks after the previous batch of six locos.  The other loco of the pair (KS 3075) did in fact have timber buffer planks in front of the steel buffer beams like all the earlier locos and so I think its very unlikely that KS 3074 was any different.  I have found a photograph of this loco which was published some time ago by Real Photographs and taken I believe by W.H.Whitworth while the loco was still under L.H.& J.C. ownership.  This confirms that the timber was removed from the front buffer beam but appears to show that it was still in place on the rear buffer beam.  I can't reproduce the whole photograph here for reasons of copyright but maybe I can be excused for reproducing just part of it. 

 

 

 

The RCTS thumbnails shown in Post #41 appear to show that the bunker was later modified with a straight vertical back plate instead of the previous reverse curved back plate.  So I am wondering whether the footplate and frames were only extended when this was carried out ?

 

A further point to note from the Whitworth photo is the lettering on the side tanks.  Under L.H.& J.C. ownership the locos were lettered "L. H. J. C." or "L. H. &  J. C." on the tender or tank side with the number on the cab side or bunker.  However in the photo the number is painted in the middle of the side tanks in a similar style to the letters so it actually appears as - "L. H. 41 J. C."

Edited October 15, 2018 by PGH

[Guest Isambarduk]

OK, Chris and Chris, it’s safe to come out from behind the settee and to open your eyes again now:

 

 

I have ticked off the last of the tasks from my list and No. 41 will soon be off to the paint shop. However, before that, I put in place nearly all the loose bits that will not be permanently attached until after painting and took these two photographs.

David

[Guest Isambarduk]

David,

 

The skill and craftsmanship displayed in this thread is truly outstanding and I think we should all be grateful for your detailed description of exactly how the results were achieved.

 

However there is one aspect of the prototype locomotive that I'm very curious about - the rear extension of the footplate and frames.  As stated in the first post, No.41 (KS 3074) was one of the last two to be built and the pair were despatched together from the builder on 14/9/1917, just over two weeks after the previous batch of six locos.  The other loco of the pair (KS 3075) did in fact have timber buffer planks in front of the steel buffer beams like all the earlier locos and so I think its very unlikely that KS 3074 was any different.  I have found a photograph of this loco which was published some time ago by Real Photographs and taken I believe by W.H.Whitworth while the loco was still under L.H.& J.C. ownership.  This confirms that the timber was removed from the front buffer beam but appears to show that it was still in place on the rear buffer beam.  I can't reproduce the whole photograph here for reasons of copyright but maybe I can be excused for reproducing just part of it. 

 

The RCTS thumbnails shown in Post #41 appear to show that the bunker was later modified with a straight vertical back plate instead of the previous reverse curved back plate.  So I am wondering whether the footplate and frames were only extended when this was carried out ?

 

A further point to note from the Whitworth photo is the lettering on the side tanks.  Under L.H.& J.C. ownership the locos were lettered "L. H. J. C." or "L. H. &  J. C." on the tender or tank side with the number on the cab side or bunker.  However in the photo the number is painted in the middle of the side tanks in a similar style to the letters so it actually appears as - "L. H. 41 J. C."

 

It may be of interest to show the reason for the cab alteration

 

The "problem" tunnel is the double track one on the left and note how the sides curve sharply inwards so the lack of clearance is probably due more to its shape rather than its size.  It was provided in 1865 as part of a new line which involved running powers over the N.E.R. and replaced a series of rope-worked inclines.  The single track tunnel on the right was provided later, after the acquisition by Lambton of the Hetton Collieries in 1911.  It connected the Lambton Staithes with the Hetton Staithes slightly up river to the west.

 

Philip

 

Thank you for your kind words, Philp - they are most encouraging! - and also for showing such an interest in my project.

 

Believe me, I pondered over this rearward extension of the footplate and frames for quite some time before I decided to model it.  I believe that I also have the image (showing L.  H.  41  J. C. on the side tank) from which you helpfully cropped the part to show this, and I pondered over whether it showed the original wooden buffer plank or if it was just the way that the light was falling.  I am still not certain but I also have a photograph that was taken of No. 41 with

 

41

N. C. B.

No. 2 AREA.

 

on the side tank, so it is in NCB livery but it is before the bunker was extended down to the running plate.  Here is an image, cropped for the same reason.

 

 

so I decided to fit the extension.  Without it, the lamp irons and the upper part of the bunker would have stuck out quite a bit.

 

I may have mentioned elsewhere, I am more of a model engineer than a railway modeller so, although I do try to get things correct and I love reproducing odd quirks and details of individual locomotives, I do not lose sleep over historical inaccuracies as I might over something out of square or technically implausible.

 

Thanks again, Philip, for your contribution, including the troublesome tunnel.

 

David

Edited February 25, 2018 by Isambarduk

[rope runner]

This is brilliant David - lovely craftsmanship.

 

An interesting adaptation from a "standard" design by KS. 

 

Paul A. 

[hartleymartin]

Any further news on this conversion? I realise that it has been a year since anything was posted.

[Simond]

I don’t think David spends much time on RMW.  He does have a website, which makes for an interesting read;

 

https://www.davidlosmith.co.uk/

 

best

Simon

[doilum]

Excellent work but not as pretty as Airedale!

If anyone else is brave enough to do this conversion send me a pm. I too have a set of spare cab etchings.

[Guest Isambarduk]

Martin, Hi,

 

I used to follow RMWeb avidly, almost every day but, ever since it was upgraded a few weeks ago, it's not worked for me; there must be something wrong with my settings I suppose.  For example, before I could go to 'Content I Follow' and each topic, which had postings that I had not read, would appear in a list once and in bold; clicking on it would take me to the first posting that I had not read and I could take it from there.  Now each posting appears in a list (so some topics appear very many times one after another in the list) and, if I click on one, I am not taken to the first posting that I have not read so I'm all over the place with it.  Actually, during the few days that RMWeb was down for the upgrade, I realised that I was enjoying not having the 'pressure' to keep up, I had more time available to go and do other things (such go to my workshop) and that overall I was far better off!  I do look from time to time so it was fortunate that I spotted your posting this morning before it dissappeared off the bottom of the page.

 

Anyway, on my Victory class with its Lambton cab: I painted it last summer but I became 'unstuck' on the lining of the side tanks and bunker, although all the remainder is complete and the frames are reassembled.  Whilst I had a pause to think about it a bit, I started building another loco (nominally rebuilt Royal Scot, British Legion, from a David Andrews kit) but I know what I shall do now and it involves a bit of respraying so, now that the weather is warmer (I really must set up the extractor fan for all weather operation), I shall press on with it.  Trouble is, it's always more tempting to me to work with my machine tools, soldering iron and so on than it is to work with my airbrush and, more particularly, my lining pens!  And 'people' keep asking me to repair bits of their family clocks (broken wheel teeth is the most common one) and I'm always happy to try and help them out.

 

Thank you 1whitemoor, SimonD and doilum for your kind words.

 

David

 

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Isambarduk
spelling mistake

[Mike Bellamy]

3 hours ago, Isambarduk said:

 

I used to follow RMWeb avidly, almost every day but, ever since it was upgraded a few weeks ago, it's not worked for me; there must be something wrong with my settings I suppose.  For example, before I could go to 'Content I Follow' and each topic, which had postings that I had not read, would appear in a list once and in bold; clicking on it would take me to the first posting that I had not read and I could take it from there.  Now each posting appears in a list (so some topics appear very many times one after another in the list) and, if I click on one, I am not taken to the first posting that I have not read so I'm all over the place with it.  Actually, during the few days that RMWeb was down for the upgrade, I realised that I was enjoying not having the 'pressure' to keep up, I had more time available to go and do other things (such go to my workshop) and that overall I was far better off!  I do look from time to time so it was fortunate that I spotted your posting this morning before it dissappeared off the bottom of the page.

 

 

David

 

Try following this link to the way that Andy has set up his preferences and then 'Add to your Stream' to copy it onto your activity stream - this should then give you all the new posts since your last visit - without all the duplication.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/discover/138/

 

You also need to click on the black spot at the start of the topic title to take you to the first post you have not yet read - this will be a star if it is a topic you have contributed to in the past.

 

Hope that helps

 

 

 

[Guest Isambarduk]

 

7 hours ago, Mike Bellamy said:

Try following this link ... Hope that helps

 

Thanks, Mike; I'll give it a go.  David

Edited March 27, 2019 by Isambarduk
Duplication of text.

[Guest Isambarduk]

20 hours ago, Mike Bellamy said:

Try following this link https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/discover/138/

Mike, OK, I followed your link and Andy does seem to have his preferences set closer to how mine were, but how do I determine what his prefereces are and how he set them up, please?   I do not want to see all the new posts on the modelling section of RMWeb, just the topics that I have chosen to follow.   David

[Mike Bellamy]

 

Ah - sorry can't help you there - I look at all new content and dip in and out of topics where the title just catches my eye when scrolling down the list. I don't have any topics saved or look at any particular areas. I suppose my way means that I see some rubbish and miss some good stuff but it keeps me occupied over lunch time at work . . . !!

 

Hopefully someone can come along and help further - other wise have a look in the Forum Faults and Help section

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/52-forum-rules-notices-faults-help/

 

Good Luck

[daifly]

4 hours ago, Isambarduk said:

Mike, OK, I followed your link and Andy does seem to have his preferences set closer to how mine were, but how do I determine what his prefereces are and how he set them up, please?   I do not want to see all the new posts on the modelling section of RMWeb, just the topics that I have chosen to follow.   David

David

I suspect that you've already done the hard work previously when you customised your list of threads that you followed on the old RMWeb.

At the top of this page are 4 tabs: Home, Browse, Activity and Info.

Hover the cursor over Activity and a drop-down menu appears containing the item 'Content I Follow'.

Click on that option and the threads that you used to follow should appear.

Clicking on the black dot or star at the left should take you to the first unread message.

Fingers crossed!

Dave

[Guest Isambarduk]

Yes, Dave.  I did all that (in fact 'Content I Follow' is bookmarked) and, sure enough ...

 

... I finish up where I started with multiple listing of the topics that I was following.  Never mind, thanks for your efforts to help but I'll just stick to spending more time outside or in my workshop, I think.  Bests,    David

[hartleymartin]

I was able to see the Kerr Stuart Victory class, Peckett E class and Manning Wardle K class today. I is really astounding how big the Victory is and how small the K class is standing next to it!

 

All of the above are on the wish-list for locomotive acquisitions. I'm hoping to start a new job quite soon so I'll have some money to buy things again.

[Guest Isambarduk]

On 28/03/2019 at 20:32, Isambarduk said:

... I finish up where I started with multiple listing of the topics that I was following.

 

Thanks for the suggestions, I have it sorted now!  I must say that the procedure is not well explained on the website, and it is rather less than intuitive.

 

Last year, I stalled with the rather involved lining of my Victory class with its modified Lambton cab and I have been working on other projects.  Nevertheless, I picked it up again yesterday so, hopefully, I can finish the job and have it all back together again before too long.

 

David