Jump to content
 

Great Southern Railway (Fictitious) - Signalling the changes...


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Typing going to pot - "thing" not "think".

Where I grew up, those words sound indistinguishable (relying entirely on context to convey which is appropriate), which leads to all sorts of spelling problems. (And outsiders always hear the "wrong" word.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

I could probably print them with a to-be-adjusted mitre, but printing like this means I get a perfect join between the parts and I don't need to do any filing or filling, which is a bonus for me - I'm lazy!

Of course, that had occurred to me, but I didn't want to shoot myself in the foot over it...

 

Investing in the time to learn the required skills is not laziness.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have the same 3D printer as I have. I found thin horizontal items tended to curve, maybe due to the force of the spatula when removing the items off the plate when the printed items are still soft. Vertical prints were much better. Many suggest 45 degrees to stop the impact of suction creating distortion as the plate lifts up and back down between layers.

 

It seems you have your 3D printer in a domestic setting. I hope you are aware that 3D resin is highly toxic. I made a container tray lined with laminated sheet. I also have an air extractor system. Having said that, I have now purchased (but not yet used) some of Anycubic's plant based non-toxic eco resin.

 

Must say you are making very good progress and producing good stuff at a rate of knots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alan,

I've tried printing at various angles, but I generally find that for square shapes like wagon bodies, flat is the way to go. This print was done with no floor and no roof, in order to minimise large flat areas against the film. 

I'm aware of the toxicity of the resin, but I'm limited by my living accommodation - a rented (ie: no modifications to the room) first-floor (so no garden or garage!) flat in Edinburgh. There will soon be a drip tray, and I'm working with gloves and a mask (with plans to get a proper respirator when funds allow). The only room in the flat with extraction is the bathroom, and there's no power in that room of course! The printer usually gets fairly infrequent use, especially during winter when I don't want to have the windows open! I'm currently looking at some of the fume-reduction bits available on Thingiverse, which allow the fitting of respirator cartridges to the extractor fan outlet on the printer itself.

Thank you - I tend to have various projects on the go at any given time, and swap between them based on my mood/situation. I've had a fair bit of train travel recently, hence the CAD on the laptop. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night, while sat by the layout, I was having a lovely catch-up with a friend on the phone. I had recently discovered another GBL SECR C class bodyshell and tender. At various points in the conversation we kept coming back to ideas for things to do with said bodyshell.

"Make another 2-4-0!" 
"How about an 0-6-2t?"

But one idea has stuck, enough that I couldn't get to sleep until I confined it to paper. I found a scale drawing of a C class online and started playing to see if my thoughts could be made plausible. I therefore present to you, the GSR Class B 0-4-4t, a mixed-traffic design, used for local passenger services but also perfectly capable of the relatively short goods services on the line. With steam braking on all wheels, the loco handles loose-coupled goods quite admirably.

image.png.78cd8a7ebbf0d0181369eb5e7aa865a9.png

Now, where did I put my hacksaw? As designed, the loco has a shortened firebox compared to the C class, with the tank sides planned to come from the tender front, and hopefully the bunker from the tender rear. These will also save me the hassle of creating all those lovely flared edges, while hopefully keeping a family resemblance between the GSR in-house desiged locos.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
48 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

the tank sides planned to come from the tender front, 

 

Ah, that explains. I was going to remark that the tanks could be a bit higher. You don't need the handrail alongside the tank top. 

 

With that low tank, it's reminiscent of Johnson's Great Eastern 134 Class 0-4-4Ts - the very first side tank 0-4-4Ts - after Adams had given them cabs:

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose that makes sense re: the boiler handrails - as I say, this was a quick sketch to settle my mind to sleep! I liked the idea of a low side tank, it looks a bit like an SECR Q tank too. Besides, with no two stations on the GSR being more than about 5 miles apart, I didn't feel I needed all that much water capacity. It certainly looks more than my Adams Radial!

 

I am still kind of pondering a half-cab, as it would lend an older air to the loco. I was thinking that a half-cab would give a distinctly Midland style to the loco, but of course the GWR used them as well, although with tank engines spending half of their life running backwards, I can't imagine they were that popular with crews in winter! 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Skinnylinny said:

I didn't feel I needed all that much water capacity. It certainly looks more than my Adams Radial!

Most tank locos carried some water at the bottom of the bunker*, too. You can clearly see it here on the GA drawing Hornby published:

 

dGA-of-4-4-2-Adams-Radial-T-OPC8131.jpg

 

*Obviously, in a separate chamber. ;)

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's what the big chunky plumbing is behind the cab footsteps - the pipe that links the front and bunker water tanks! Plus that bunker tank gives a nice slope to bring coal  to the front of the bunker. Perfect!

I'm thinking I might narrow the cab opening a little and lengthen the bunker instead. Decisions, decisions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
47 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

the pipe that links the front and bunker water tanks!

Will also be a transverse pipe somewhere, called a balancing pipe to keep the weight of water the same in each tank. This is very prominent on GWR pannier tanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
48 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

Would that be necessary if both side tanks are linked via the bunker tank?

What do you think?

Also, on an Adams' Radial, the filler is at the rear, so that would be the logical arrangement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

I'm thinking I might narrow the cab opening a little and lengthen the bunker instead. Decisions, decisions.

 

I think so. The cab handrails are 1'6" ?-ish on the Adams radial drawing - that's fairly typical. 

 

1 hour ago, Regularity said:

Will also be a transverse pipe somewhere, called a balancing pipe to keep the weight of water the same in each tank. This is very prominent on GWR pannier tanks.

 

I think that's more usual - the Adams radial has an unusually long bunker and small tanks. Most tank engines of this sort of size have shorter bunkers entirely given over to coal. Possibly the Adams radial is the missing evolutionary link between the classic side tank and the earlier back tank types:

 

1185283973_690Class0-4-4T.jpg.081ae3b113264556411c92217190033e.jpg

 

In this case the chunky pipe is the condensing pipe.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

All tank locos have some kind of balancing pipe to link the tanks, otherwise you'd have to fill both sides separately - just they're normally hidden between the tanks under the boiler. They're often quite visible on panniers though.

 

I seem to remember the radials also having a well tank between the frames?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

In this case the chunky pipe is the condensing pipe.

 

Another pipe thing about that 780 Class back tank - you can see that the vacuum brake was an afterthought - the pipe makes its way along the framing wherever it can be squeezed in without getting in the way of something else.

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

So, a bit more playing around in Microsoft Paint may have happened... 
image.png.eb9157532973b9e47076cad78d6981b2.png
I could only find a photo of the Farish N gauge C class from a good enough side view to patch the image above together. The rear bogie as it stands is from a Hornby H class, but I might cheat and go for a slightly-longer-wheelbase B12 bogie I've got lying around. That said, that might foul where the firebox would go. I'll have to see what is available/what I can make.

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, that could definitely work. Just file the serial numbers off paint over the "&" and "W" in G & S W R to give G    S    R, and perfect! I think such a loco would need slightly larger splashers, and I'm not sure if I could find a justification for it, beyond Rule 1, but that's what Rule 1 is for, right?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another weekend away meant a little more time on the train to work on the cattle wagon. I'm down to small details now - I've cut a recess to allow a plasticard floor (10 thou planked), fitted all the tie down rings, and got some springs on the axleboxes. Tasks still remaining: Bolt heads on the end strapping, brakes, and buffers. 

image.png.c108b63cd3b37b4ebb6e65edc8f4fd7a.png

 

Work has also started on the 0-4-4t. I'm still not sure about the long bunker, although I think it's growing on me. Again, it makes the loco look older, which is always a bonus when starting with a 1903 design! The boiler has been shortened a little, too, and the tender's been chopped all over the shop! 

I'm definitely going to want a shorter-wheelbase trailing bogie - this one's off an old-model B12 and it fouls where the firebox should be.

20200126_231859.jpg

  • Like 6
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 24/01/2020 at 20:44, Nick C said:

All tank locos have some kind of balancing pipe to link the tanks, otherwise you'd have to fill both sides separately - just they're normally hidden between the tanks under the boiler. They're often quite visible on panniers though.

 

I seem to remember the radials also having a well tank between the frames?

 

Running joke when putting the water treatment in is to 'make sure you get an even amount both sides of the saddle'

 

Great work Linny, love how it's coming together.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Your new 4-4-0T really does have a delightful vintage look to it Linny.  Just the sort of thing an impetuous minor railway might have picked up on the second hand market.

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...